Category: Community Policing

In the late 1960s, with an increase in crime rates and a growing dissatisfaction with police effectiveness, academics and other experts on policing called for newer and innovative practices in policing. The model at the time, which would later become known as the “standard” or “professional” model, represented the long-standing traditional aspects of policing. These strategies were generally reactive in nature and focused primarily on the enforcement of law. For instance, since police response time to a crime scene was seen as a key indicator of police department efficacy, increasing the number of patrol cars and finding other methods of decreasing response time were seen as primary solutions. Such strategies often led to agencies becoming more concerned with logistical efficiencies rather than their impact on safety as a whole. In the standard model, police departments were quite insular, having little need for collaboration with other community groups or institutions. Furthermore, police departments used similar strategies of enforcement across differing geographies and demographics. They derived their legitimacy through enforcement power rather than increasing rapport and respect through mutual connections with the community. Powers to detain and arrest, granted by the letter of the law, was their primary method to prevent and control crime (Weisburd & Eck, 2004).

One of the early implementations to diversify strategies of policing came was a program in the state of New Jersey called the Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. It was funded by the state as part of its comprehensive Safe and Clean Neighborhoods program. The hypothesis for the experiment was that shifting patrol officers from their cars to foot patrol would connect them more tightly to their specific neighborhoods. The hope was that officers on foot would get to know both the residents and business owners during their routine daily patrols. They would learn not only who the trouble-makers were, they would also gain familiarity with the neighborhood’s unique culture. Having such close ties with all of the inhabitants (residents, business owners, adolescents, etc.) minimized the longstanding the one-size-fits-all method of policing. Police officers could use greater discretion in their patrols because of their familiarity with the inhabitants (Kelling, 1981).

An extensive report was written by George Kelling (1981) for the Police Foundation describing the results of increased foot patrols in the Newark neighborhoods. One of the surprising findings of the experiment was that bringing patrol officers out of their automobiles and onto the streets did not actually decrease the crime rate in those neighborhoods. What it did, however, was decrease the perception of crime in those areas amongst the residents and business owners by bringing a sense of order and immediacy to managing crime-related problems. Officers targeted minor infractions such as loitering, panhandling, and prostitution, because it was believed these frequent and visible crimes created a sense of pervasive disorder. As a result of the consistent enforcement from foot patrol officers, meaning increased summonses and citations, law-offenders knew which lines they could and could not cross. For instance, “Drunks and addicts could sit on the stoops, but could not lie down. People could drink on side streets, but not at the main intersection” (Kelling & Wilson, 1982, para. 8).

A second finding from study became known as the broken window effect. Later described in an Atlantic magazine article by the author of the report, the social psychology theory stated that if one broken window was left unrepaired in a building, it attracted further vandalism and soon other windows would also get broken. In other words, maintaining the perception that the neighborhood was well patrolled, and that criminal behavior was immediately dealt with led to residents to feeling safer. The foot patrol officers also disrupted noncriminal behavior such as loitering and panhandling. This meant they were more comfortable walking the streets, shopping at local businesses, and spending more time outdoors. Philip Zimbardo, the noted Stanford social psychologist, created an experiment that reproduced the effect. He left an automobile in a Bronx neighborhood with its hood up and license plates removed. He hypothesized that its abandoned appearance would attract further vandalism, and it did. Within minutes passersby began to remove other parts and further destroy the car. Across the country, in Palo Alto, California, Zimbardo left a similar car on the street but this one had no signs of abandonment (hood closed and with license plates). The car remained untouched in California for an entire week until the researcher smashed its windshield. Similar to the results in the Bronx, once windshield was broken and the car showed signs of abandonment, passersby in California also destroyed the car over the following days (Kelling & Wilson, 1982).

In terms of race, little was mentioned in the report from Kelling (1981). Race was not a substantive finding or consideration between police and residents. In fact, it was only noted in the follow-up Atlantic article that although the majority of police officers were white and the neighborhoods they patrolled in Newark were predominantly African American, residents and believed the “function of the police was performed to the general satisfaction of both parties” (Kelling & Wilson, 1982, para. 6). However, in the coming years, policing based on the broken windows theory would be widely criticized particularly because of its disproportionate impact on citizens of color.

One of the most visible proponents of the broken windows theory was NYPD Police Commissioner William Bratton. By the mid-1990s, the NYPD had instituted policies that increased enforcement of misdemeanor crimes, similar to the strategy that Newark foot patrol officers used. In the year 2000, NYPD officers had made 51,267 arrests for smoking marijuana in public view, abbreviated at MPV. As a comparison, in 1994, there were only 1,851—an increase of 2,670 percent. African Americans and Hispanics were disproportionately affected. While each group made up about 25 percent of the city’s population, they accounted for 52 and 32 percent of MPV arrestees for the years 2000-2003 (Harcourt & Ludwig, 2007).

Analyzing data from earlier research by Golub, Johnson, and Dunlap (2007), Harcourt and Ludwig (2007) found no evidence that arrests for MPV could be associated with reduced violence or property crimes in New York City. Given the dramatic racial disparity for MPV arrests, NYPD would have needed to believe that such unfairness could be justified by the larger societal goal of reducing marijuana consumption overall, but there was no evidence that these two minority groups were the majority consumers of marijuana. Additionally, believing that these marijuana-related arrests reduced overall crime ignored the fact that other substances such as alcohol and cocaine are more highly correlated with violent or criminal behavior (Harcourt & Ludwig, 2007).

Endorsed by the federal government through legislation called the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Acton of 1994. Created the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services to manage funding and reported on progress.

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) of the U.S. Department of Justice defines community policing as “a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime” (***, p. 3). It is typically implemented through three strategies: community partnerships, organizational transformation, and problem solving.

According to statistics from a Police Foundation survey as far back as 1997, each of the police departments serving populations over 100,000 who responded to the survey all reported incorporating community policing principles. Although this statistic appears to make community policing quite pervasive, the research tells a different story.

There have been numerous studies of individual programs over the years, but few studies exist comparing specific aspects of programs to each other. Part of the reason for this is the lack of consistent implementation given the many variables that potentially may be included within a department’s adoption of the framework. Given that there has been a governmental office (COPS) funding much of these initiatives, it is surprising that more research does not exist (Gill, Weisburd, Telep, Vitter and Bennett (2014).

Results of a recent study by Braga, Brunson and Drakulich (2019) indicate that stronger analysis of crime data is needed to better inform policing policies and practices. The authors describe the “policing paradox” where residents in impoverished areas, often of color, feel both under-policed as well as over-policed. Disproportionate crime statistics in those areas call for increased police presence yet their residents’ longstanding history of mistreatment by police make them more likely to resist police involvement.

The authors not that it is particularly problematic to label entire neighborhoods as troubled when data shows that small numbers of frequent offenders are responsible for the majority of crime. (Thurman, Reisig, 1996)

References

1. Braga, A., Brunson, R., Drakulich, K. (2019) — pdf
2. Community Policing Defined (COPS Office) (PDF) ISBN: 978-1-935676-06-5
3. Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vitter, Z., & Bennett, T. (2014). Community-oriented policing to reduce crime, disorder and fear and increase satisfaction and legitimacy among citizens: A systematic review. Journal of experimental criminology, 10(4), 399-428.
4. Golub, A., Johnson, B. D., & Dunlap, E. (2007). The race/ethnicity disparity in misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City. Criminology & public policy, 6(1), 131-164.
5. Harcourt, B. E., & Ludwig, J. (2007). Reefer madness: Broken windows policing and misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City, 1989–2000. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(1), 165-181
6. Kerley, K., Benson, M., (2000) Does Community-Oriented Policing Help Build Stronger Communites? Police Quarterly Vol 3 No 1 p.46-69
7. Kelling, G., & Wilson, J. (1982). Broken windows. Atlantic monthly, 249(3), 29-38. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/
8. Kelling, G., (1981). The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. Washington, DC: Police Foundation https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/144273499-The-Newark-Foot-Patrol-Experiment.pdf
9. Kelling, G. L., Pate, A. M., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: A technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
10. Article defining community oriented policing https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/prevention-focused-community-policing/?ref=58372f7c6dbed1fb489784049926497f

Throughout of the course taken this semester (CJ311) there has been quite a bit of discussion on crime and exactly what are the moral principles that come into play when crime happens. Over the past 19 years, ever since the massive terrorist attack that happened in our country, there has been rising of concerns and questions. The concern is personal liberty has diminished in the face of personal safety and the question following that is with the concern of personal safety has it redefined the understanding of what is considered acceptable for criminal investigation tactics used by law enforcement. Today, there is going to be explanation on the impact changes that have happened in criminal investigation techniques and the methods that community policing may have. Also, criminal prosecution and the ability of major crimes being investigated by police.

In todays society, people are quite aware of terrorism and how homeland security’s concerns have redefined the acceptable tactics of investigation that is being used by law enforcement. Americans concern for personal liberty and personal protection should maintained at a balance. Concerns are continuing to rise from the public about their sense of security.

When it comes to the relation between officers and the community it is a major concern for law enforcement. Without the help from community’s police will find it challenging because police want to be able to trust those within the communities, they want to be able to find or have cooperating witnesses. If police cannot get this from their community it may lead to leaving police with fear. Without the help and support from the community’s, police would not be able to do their jobs. Without the help and support the police would be taken over by the communities because there is simply not may police officers. With the demand from the government and police agencies are having a difficult time with the tactics that are put in place, which can lead to an issue. It could possibly cause things to get out of hand, but possibly not happen if checked on. As tactics harshen, the trust from the public will start to fade and as mentioned earlier making police officers jobs a bit harder.

When it comes to effective investigative tactics used on criminal procedures, they seem to be quite similar to police community relations. However, when it comes to investigators, they need to be able to find more evidence, because the more evidence collected the high there is for investigators to have a winning case. Now when it comes to the court process there are safeguards that are put in place to protect defendants. With policy implements such as the Exclusionary Rule, the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment; these are put in place to help protect defendants’ rights. Police have now become more restricted in the way they preform at their job.

Defendants’ rights during a trial “have several constitutional rights including the remaining silent, confront witness, the right to have a public trial, the right to have a jury, the right to have a speedy trial, be represented by an attorney, and lastly, not be tried twice for the same offence” (Criminal Defendants’ Rights, n.d.).

Lasty, how do the changes in investigative techniques and methods affect the ability of police to investigate major crimes? As mentioned in the previous paragraph defendants during trial they have benefits and protection, because of this it may make investigators job a bit more complex. Not only that, but investigators are already trying to find the perpetrator (which is already difficult), they are also trying to gather evidence against the perpetrator. Which causes them trying to accomplish their case a difficult way. But with the new developments of the Patriot Act police agencies are able to have more leeway in the apprehension of terrorism. Which makes law enforcements job a bit easier.

The modern era of American policing

In 1751 America’s first paid police department started in the city of Philadelphia, unlike London’s bow street runners that started in 1749, the Philly department was more organized. Throughout history law enforcement officers have had the upmost respect from the public, they made the streets safer for the public. There was a time back in police history where officers would have casual conversations with those they had arrested, because they were a part of the community still even though they had committed a crime. In this time in policing, things are so much different, the general public have such a negative stigma about law enforcement officers in their head that it does not matter who the officer is, they are immediately judged on the actions of another.

Social turning points in the development of policing

In the past 20 years America has experienced many turning points for law enforcement officers. Including the most popular, ‘’Black Lives Matter’’ movement that started in 2013. This group believes that black people are being racially targeted by law enforcement. As we all know that this is not true, this group speaks up every time there is a law enforcement officer to black person shooting or injury. Surprising thing is, they mainly only say something if it is a white officer to black person, they hardly ever protest the black officer to black person. For many departments, they are trying out a style of policing called ‘’community policing’’. Community policing is more proactive in nature and tends to give the public more trust in you as an officer, as explained here, ‘’Intended to prevent crime before it happens rather than responding to crime after it occurs, Focuses on creating a safe social environment, Engages residents to determine which criminal activities they are most affected by, creating an accurate law enforcement priority list shaped by the people who live in the area, Encourages residents to participate with law enforcement in order to keep their own community safe’’ (Lortz, 2016).

What is the future of policing?

I believe that the future of policing is community policing. I believe that we as officers need to work towards being more proactive instead of reactive. If officers had to retrain in certain areas such as OWI and drug recognition more often, maybe we would be able to stop more accidents before they happen. I’m sure most people will complain that I am even suggesting more training, but it’s when we think we know it all is when we get complacent. Also, on the lines of community policing, I was told in my academy that my backup might be 10 minutes out when I call out shots fired and sometimes the only people that are going to be there to help me will be the community I serve. That guy I ticketed for speeding last week might save my life one day, it’s all about being respectful to one another especially as a police officer. In this article here it describes how an officer was in an fight with a person, ends up taking a bullet to the neck, and just when he thinks it is all over someone steps in and saves the day, ‘’A former felon, he would later learn. A man who turned his life around and found God. A lifelong hunter who begged a judge to reinstate his rights, allowing him to carry a gun again — the one he just fired’’ (Kravarik and Elam, 2017).

Introduction to Conventional Policing and Community Policing

Advancements in conventional policing have strengths and weaknesses. Policing is being strengthened with active crime prevention. Commitments to community policing and flexibility see adaptations within the police force when addressing evolving crime. Proactive conventional policing is based on traditional police practice, with the addition of technological advancements in intelligence-led policing. Operational tactics and organisational structures are changing current crime control philosophy and police practice.

This essay will discuss various issues surrounding the strengths and weaknesses attributed to the primary process and benefits in advancement models of policing. The main subtopics of the essay will be rapid advancements in conventional policing, including patrol & rapid response, legal authority and constraints, police activity research, challenges to standard model policing and foot patrol police. The limitations of conventional policing, strategic shifts in operational police practice, community policing, advanced techniques & systems integrate, with advanced models of hot spot policing, third party policing, recruitment management and leadership with evidence, examples and comparing the contrast from different perspectives.

I hypothesise that conventional police practice has a proactive focus on crime prevention. Conventional police practice and organisations all have strengths and weaknesses, but overall are proactive in advancing towards better more efficient and reliable consistency of policing.

The integration of traditional policing strategies of effectiveness and efficiency are combined with advancements in contemporary police practice to reduce crime.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Standard Policing Model

The standard model of policing is the basics from which today’s conventional police force has been formed. The process of rapid advancements is strengthening the process of policing, seeing increased benefits within conventional policing. Weisburd & Eck’s (2004) stated that police typology is two dimensional, diversity of approach and level of focus. The standard model strategies of the traditional policing approaches to dealing with the crime were mainly developed during the reform or professional era in the 1930s; the standards are the strength and basis of the conventional police force ( Kelling & Moore 1998). The standard policing weakness lacks empirical support; instead, the focus should be on police practice that is tailored and expanded beyond standardisation within law enforcement would be more beneficial (Sherman 1997).

Patrol and Rapid Response: Backbone of Contemporary Policing

Patrol and rapid response are an integral element of contemporary policing. Patrol is the backbone of policing (Walker 1977). With advancements in technology stations and beats have 24/7 geographical coverage. The community sees strength in numbers with more visibility of police in uniforms, police cars and foot patrols. Rapids response is covered through call centres triage system. The triage system is operated by highly trained personal, which strengthens rapid response times.

Reactive policing is essential, but a balance of police strategy needs to be considered and assessed by police agencies (Drew & Prenzler 2015). The classical theory of crime deterrence is by certainty, severity, swiftness of punishment and incapacitation. The standard model of patrol policing includes investigating, traffic policing, emergency assistance and management, missing persons, court security, risky evictions, death notices, random breath testing and dragnets and licensing checks. In conventional police CCTV surveillance is beneficial for society, tracking people’s movements, credit card analysis and travel movements. The negative of CCTV surveillance is that people feel like their privacy is being invaded. Riot police and police rescue are highly trained to be dispersed in situations where beat police need extra assistance to keep the community safe.

Legal Authority and Constraints in Policing

Legal authority and constraints are an ongoing debate, strengthen police authority using more restraint or does more force reduce the community respect for the police? Police have the legal power to arrest citizens for indictable crimes using proportionate force. Specific police powers differ for each incident, in an accident or crime scene the police have the power to direct, stop suspects, search, question name and address if under reasonable suspicion (Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000). Police have the legal authority to constrain a suspect if an assault, for example, is committed. Legal authority and proportionate constraint strengthen and develops respect throughout the community.

Community satisfaction depends on perceived expectations to faster response times. Witness and victim statements consume police response times to solving crimes. Police science advancements and increasing data resource availability and saving time which is strengthening outcomes (Sullivan 2018).

Foot patrol outcomes do not show a reduction in crime; however, statistics show that people feel safer if they see police around. Optimising patrols through crew sizes, shift lengths, triage priorities, reduced public expectations, delaying responses to none critical call outs, offload of non-core tasks and prevention of false alarms would see a better outcome (Ratcliffe, Groff, Sorg & Haberman 2015). The limitations of conventional policing methods, including prevention patrols. Between calls for service, officers are expected to randomly cruise neighbourhoods doing prevention patrols to deter crime. Prevention patrols decrease citizens fears that the police are deterring offenders by their presence. While this may increase the public’s feeling of safety, research shows no significant difference in criminal activity when patrols are present.

The rapid response suggests that responding quickly to the scene of an incident increases the police’s ability to catch the offender. Victim assistance response is more accurate when information is received quickly after the crime was committed. Calls for service are dispatched quickly with new technology, which has improved response time (Kelling and Moore (1998).

In conventional police recruitment, it is not just size and strength that is taken into consideration. Strengths in conventional policing come from a better, more rounded recruitment process. Psychological tests, job analysis, integrity checks, higher education, equity & affirmative action, representative selection committees and civilianisation are all part of the recruitment criteria. Even with advancements in the recruitment process, police officers still need ongoing psychological checks. Proactive mental health support is a primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of policing (Adams, Stanwick & Marden 2002).

Strategic shifts in operational police practice come from politicians and the community; their reaction to crime is to increase police numbers. The police to population ratio is an objective measure to weather the police numbers are sufficient to fulfil the policing mandate (Drew & Prenzler 2010). A methodological and statistical rigour to understanding the addition of police numbers in reducing crimes rates is analysed in police data (Marvell & Moody 1996). Each additional police officer added to larger cities with an average population of 250,000 reduced the crime rate by 24 fewer crimes (Sherman 1997).

Weaknesses in conventional policing are represented by miscarriages of justice, negligent investigations, failure to prosecute, vindictive investigations/prosecutions, excessive/inadequate penalties and wrongful convictions. Low crime conviction rates in Australia of 4% crimes and imprisonment rate of 1% is not going to reduce recidivism (Mukherjee 1987).

Community Policing and Engagement

Positive effective reforms through community policing consultations and liaison officers in implementing policies and procedures for alternatives to arrest and detention. Community engagement and increased community and police safety through the reduction of escalating situations.

Advanced Techniques and Systems in Modern Policing

Advanced techniques & systems integrating mixed teams, multi-tasking and specialist agencies are at the forefront of the primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of policing. The primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models are developments in the modern technological era. Technological advancements for interviews are crucial; interviews are recorded with modern equipment which will preserve the evidence and case material long term, in case of cold cases or future evidence. Interviewing has ethical values and is completed with preparation, respect, non-coercive voice and assistance for welfare assistance if required. Advanced models of policing now include cold case units, independent forensic science units, independent forensic unit accreditation & auditing, media management, case auditing (quality control, criminal case review commissions, victim & witness communication and computer alerts for victim contacts (Drew & Prenzler 2015).

Contemporary police practice includes community policing, hot spot policing, third party policing and problem-orientated policing. Community policing strength is the relationship between procedural justice and police legitimacy, which reduces crime outcomes (Sherman & Eck 2002). Weaknesses of community policing are the agencies do not clearly understand expected outcomes. Community officers need to be more excepted by police; they are working to help them after all. Advanced models of problem-orientated policing (POP) is attributing to better analysis and problem-solving in repose to crime reduction outcomes (National Research Council 2004).

Advanced models of hot spot policing are one of the main processes which are currently being focused on to strengthen the police force. The fight against crime through hot spot policing has weaknesses in its approach. Spatial displacement is the main weakness or criticism observed from hot spot policing; the criminals move on to another area (Weisburd & Eck 2004). The strength of hot spot policing is employing officers to specific crime locations. Advanced models show that specific times of high crime concentration of police officers will reduce crimes committed.

Third-party policing builds on police development by adopting partnerships. Third-party policing is strengthening the police force through legal, civil and regulators, seeing a positive outcome specifically in controlling drugs, violent crime and youth associated problems (Mazerolle & Ransley 2006).

Investigating is prioritisation through a triage system are used in policing to utilise police resources effectively. Investigation of crime has become a formal and significant role in policing. The investigation detective units are a positive focus away from private prosecutions to recent prosecutions (Matassa & Newburn 2007). The strength in prosecuting crimes is due to the switch from civil law to modern criminal law. The weakness of detective investigation units is corruption, deterring honest police from applying to join the detective units.

Diversity and Accountability in Policing

Police diversity within diverse communities is often divided by race, ethnicity, location, social status and gender. The police are challenged to the task of egalitarian and being impartial. The subordinate statue can seem vulnerable, such as homeless people. The weakness is police oppression, a reoccurring problem amongst minority’s, for example, race riots. Racism and discrimination by police within communities show marginalised groups have less respect for police, as they feel targeted and reserve more attention. In the year 2000, an American survey concluded that support for police from white people was 64 per cent, but support from African Americans was only 37 per cent (Gabbidon & Greene p. 117, 2013). Improving and strengthening relationships between police and minority’s is coming from the formulation of respect and continuation of programs on both sides, community support and police training.

Recruitment management and leadership effectiveness are essential for conventional police reputation and functioning. Weaknesses occur when the wrong officers are selected for a specific police function which he or she is not trained for or has not got the will to authority to do the job correctly. With a large number of people applying for the police force the strength of officers both physically, psychological and educational makes the selection of recruits of a higher standard level (Kumar 2009). Effective human resource management contributes positively to advanced models of conventional policing.

Accountability and regulation are proactively adopting new systems and performance measures in conventional police practice. Weakness in accountability was seen throughout the 1980s with misconduct scandals. Strengthening accountability through new systems and performance criteria is controlling the process more proactively. Police are accountable when on duty and obliged to be responsible and liable.

Strengthening in regulations is seeing better control, management, compliance, mitigation, performance measures, standards, strategies and restraint within the conventional force (Prenzler 2019). The Australian Government Productivity Commission (2018) stated that on average of 82% of people were satisfied with police services and 74% of people agreed that police treat people fairly.

Attention to problems, issues, debates and conflicts occurs in various locations. Police organisations and security companies see threats and are calling for the Government to update protocol for dealing with new waves of crime. New policing powers of detention and questioning have also been given to the leading domestic security agency. The Australian Secret Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) and on occasions to the military, and policing functions and powers have been very broadly extended to local governments, infrastructure providers and providers of financial and private security services (Baldino 2007).

Counter-terrorism branches of the (AFP) now have a national counter-terrorism planning committee (McFarlane, 2007). (AFP) have broader new powers to respond to the domestic risk of terrorism through new legislation, powers, security, military response and surveillance techniques (Australian Federal Police 2001).

The primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of conventional policing are being seen through innovative technological advancements. Most notably is information gathering through crime mapping, data mining, storage and retrieval systems and surveillance including CCTV, listening devices and satellites. These technologies are used in a range of information-dependent tactics such as problem oriented policing and intelligence-led policing. Technology is a primary tool, both for information gathering and intelligence systems for surveillance and for analysis in COMP STAT, risk assessment tools.

Conclusion: Evaluating the Progress in Policing

In concluding the standard model of policing strengths benefit from increased visibility which is a general deterrence of crime through foot patrols and motorised patrols. Support systems for victims and families are provided through follow up investigations, for example, a domestic violence case. Weaknesses include the risk of racial profiling and lack of community involvement. Strategic programs are strengthening police approaches to crime with technological advancements leading the way for the future through intelligence surveillance.

The effectiveness of how constabularies deal with violent crime, particularly knife crime, has become a controversial subject in recent years – public ideas on how such issues should be tackled have evolved over time. Traditional principles of violent crime prevention were to apprehend law-breakers and hold them accountable for the crimes they had committed (Wilson and McLaren, 1977). Methods such as preventative control and rapid response, were useful in this approach, however, as the limits of these methods began to become recognised, police experimented with new methods of dealing with these issues. Recently, policing has become open to broader concepts of crime prevention, becoming more interested in anticipating crime as opposed to dealing with it, post-event. Proactive and regulatory efforts have been made to deal with violent crime, such as knife crime, as opposed to strictly reactive methods. This lead to the development of Problem-Orientated Policing and Community Policing. Both of these approaches aim to tackle offending in a prescient fashion, however, have key differences.

Problem-Oriented Policing emerged in 1979, after University of Wisconsin professor, Herman Goldstein, coined the term. During this time, a broader understanding among leading criminologists had emerged that crime was more of a by-product of larger social forces and that police, in themselves, had a lower impact on the rate of crime than once believed (Hirschmi and Gottfredson, 1999. As the public idea that police were ‘crime fighters’ had less relevance in actual practise. ‘Traditional’ policing had seen that varying levels of preventative control didn’t actually reduce crime rates and that rapid response had become ill-effective, due to the lack of crimes that were reported mid-event – and therefore, did not increase the probability of arrest and follow-up investigations only lead to sparse convictions. Goldstein challenged police policy with Problem-Orientated Policing. This approach aims to identify the wider, socially-ingrained causes as to why crimes occur and frame solutions to these issues using the S.A.R.A model. Police must systematically respond to recurring issues and gather information and design approaches to prevent crime at its root cause. Goldstein stated that the problem solving approach required ‘identifying these problems in more precise terms, researching each problem, documenting the nature of the current police response, assessing its adequacy and the adequacy of existing authority and resources, engaging in a broad exploration of alternatives to present responses, weighing the merits of these alternatives, and choosing among them.’

When looking specifically at knife crime, Problem-Orientated Policing has been used in many areas of the UK. In April 2019, Home Secretary Sajid Javid, revealed plans for a ‘radical blueprint’ for dealing with knife crime by ‘bringing together “education, health, social services, housing, youth and social workers” together to help support vulnerable young people who could be at risk.’ Proposals have also been backed by the Metropolitan Police, to bring in a new legal duty for front-line education, hospital, and police force workers to report all ‘warning signs’ of knife crime among young people. Research from the College Of Policing, demonstrates that given the range of motivation for knife crime to individually occur, tailored approaches such as ‘problem-oriented policing, focused deterrence strategies which target high risk offenders, and early preventative work aimed at supporting potentially ‘at-risk’ individuals’.

Becky Clarke et al found that a succession of harms endured by young people should ‘act as a warning’ against direct, rapid and ‘knee jerk’ reactions to knife crime. Social harms can include difficult financial climates, gang violence and rising political hostility – and these can often be the undertone or root causes as to why knife crime can occur. Drawing on the work of Goldstein, many experts argue that policing simply is not enough to prevent these crimes from occurring and that preventative action would be more effective by combatting the issues head on, as opposed to just dealing with the individual crimes. The impact of ‘knee-jerk’ reactions can not only cause a further and deeper rift in the relationship between the police and the wider community, but potentially inspire a spike in the crime that is attempting to be combatted , as a retaliation against the police, or the wider institutional system that the police make up – that they believe is causing them the ‘social harms’ in the first instance. By combatting the social harm at its root cause, supporters of problem-orientated policing argue that by taking a ‘social worker’ approach to the issue, the understanding between the community and the local authorities would improve and see a diminishment of the recurring crime issue. Jackson (2016) argues that there is one ‘fundamental problem’ with only focusing on the initial crime – he argues that ‘a crime has to be committed and someone victimised’ before action is taken. He argues that problem orientated policing – rather than allowing a person to suffer the consequences of a crime against them – diminishes the threat before the crime can take place, and by doing this, life-long change can be inspired into the individual and wider community.

When discussing the effectiveness of problem orientated policing against knife crime, Operation Ceasefire serves as a key piece of evidence. Operation Ceasefire, otherwise known as the ‘Boston Gun Project’, served as a problem-orientated initiative aimed at looking at the homicide victimisation within the youth community of Boston. The city experienced a large-scale, serious crime epidemic between the late 1980s and early 1990s. Crime statistics showed that the degree of homicide in ages 24 and under increased 230% during this time. Operation Ceasefire began meeting in the autumn of 1995 – the primary elements of this operation were a direct law-enforcement based offensive into the illicit trade and trafficking of firearms, moreover the supply of these same firearms to children and the systematic generation of deterrence and demoralisation of gang culture in youths. Analysis shows that this initiative had a direct, statistical impact on the rate of violent crime in Boston – with a 63 percent decrease in youth homicides, with the mean number of monthly counts of homicides in the area nearly halved post-test. This evidence is compelling when considering problem-orientated policing as a way to combat knife crime, simply due to the sheer success of this initiative and the splinter initiatives that it inspired across the US. Despite this operation mainly focusing on the distribution of firearms, we can assume that the success and nature of this problem-orientated approach is also palpable and applicable when looking at very similar violent crimes – of which knife crime is one – as the investigation focuses mainly on the causes of violent crime, as opposed to the offensive weapon physically used to commit the crime.

However, despite the optimistic perspectives to problem orientated policing, progress in implementing this has been slow and patchy (HMIC, 2000) due to the problem of policing being mainly ‘demand led’. The need to respond to calls quickly is a key part of the way the UK policies, as the crime rates seem to increase. The need to respond quickly to certain events, often means that officers have less time, and funding to analyse and find solutions.

The concept of community policing is based on the idea that police officers and private citizens can work together to help solve community issues surrounding crime and disorder. This is a type of policing that uses collaboration between private members of the public and the traditional policing system, to help maintain law and order. Wilson (2006) describes this as a way to “the public should be seen along with the police as ‘co producers of safety and order”- in the UK, this is approached using PCSOs, or Police Community Support Officers. These are members of the public that train with the police to do frontline work in their neighbourhood to prevent anti-social behaviour. Due to the collaborative nature of community policing, this is often perceived as ‘softer policing’ (Friedman 1992) – as this can often be oversimplified to ‘more foot-patrols’. Responsibilities include ‘defusing situations where conflict exists’, ‘fostering, supporting and building rapport’ and ‘responding to incidents that require police action, providing solution to low level incidents within their authority’ and ‘containing situations until relieved by a qualified Police Constable’ (National PCSO handbook, 2019).

Community policing is often seen as an effective way of dealing with knife crime as it is argued that it improved the perceived legitimacy of policing in that area. Perceived legitimacy is described by Rawls (1971), as the degree to which the criminal justice system within a particular society is seen to be legitimate or ‘just’ by the people who live within that society’ – and this gives citizens the opportunity to gain more control over the quality of life in their community. This has the potential to improve not only the relationship between the police and the wider community, but gives the police the understanding of residents needs. Research suggests that a stronger sense of perceived legitimacy predicts greater law abiding behaviour in the area, as people feel their needs and quality of life has been improved and therefore, less likely to commit crimes in that area. Community officer practises, such as stop and search, also provide a pivotal impact in reducing the amount of knives in circulation, and is the key tactic for community officers attempting to tackle knife crime in their area. Research from the Metropolitan Police shows that of all arrests made for the use of offensive weapons, over 80% of these resulted from a stop and search in 1999 (Fitzgerald). However, in 2017, only 14% out of 100% of arrests were for offensive weapons, which could demonstrate the effectiveness of stop and search and community policing as a tactic.

However, the stop and search tactic is a highly controversial subject, as many experts believe that it is an ineffective strategy when dealing with knife crime. A report written by the College of Policing posed that there is a ‘question around how stop and search should be assessed’. It argues that given ‘reasonable suspicion’ searches are investigative, the drop in crime that results from them is more of a by-product of the investigation, rather than a main objective or goal. The same study found that ‘if knife searches had been upped by 10% that month, then crime rates would be down by 0.1% per cent lower in week two and 0.3 percent lower in month 2.’ Although this did prove the effectiveness of stop and search overall, these connections are inconsistent and only provides limited evidence as to how stop and search implements successfully. One highly contested issue when discussing stop and searches is how it impacts community policing as a concept. Stop and search has also been criticized due to the history of systematic discrimination against people of minorities. The most totalitarian evidence of this emerged after the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, after the unlawful killing of a young black man that demonstrated racially motivated corruption in the investigating police force. This enquiry found that people of an ethnic minority were nearly nine times more likely to be investigated by a police officer than a Caucasian counterparts – this figure has nearly doubled since Lawrence’s murder in 1998. (Macpherson report). This has caused a mistrust of the police that Keeling (2018) described as something that affected ‘their willingness to cooperate with the police and, consequently, the police’s ability to carry out investigations and reduce crime.’ As Keeling describes, this may affect the police’s ability to carry out investigations and arrest people who may be at risk of committing knife crime, but could potentially increase the chances of people carrying knives for racially charged reasons, to feel safer in their community, due to the lack of security they feel they have gained from the police – despite most convictions in the UK for knife-related crimes (Ministry of Justice, 2017).

Despite this, community policing has had some very positive effects on the general quality of life of the communities surrounding it, and stop and searches make up a small percentage of this – so the question still remains as to whether the non-enforcement related interactions between the wider public and PCSOs can cause meaningful improvements into solving knife crime. A field experiment by Peyton et al found that a community-focused intervention in policing showed that of the participants in all pre-registered ethnic subgroups in the study, black respondents had an initial impact of ~11 scale points, nearly twice as large as the response from white and hispanic participants. This would prove that community policing, despite the overall mistrust of stop and search, has an overall positive impact on the community and how quality of life is affected. A Campbell study by Gill et al (2014) examined the impact of community policing as a whole tactic on how it affects crime and disorder and citizen satisfaction, Although the study found that it only had a relatively small impact on levels of violent crime in the short, it was associated with more significant impacts with citizen satisfaction and perceived legitimacy in the longer term. This is useful to solving knife crime as, people are far less likely to carry around knives as a form of self-protection, if they feel like the police are doing protecting in the first instance.

Both forms of modern policing come with significant benefits to the local community, however, have different levels of immediate impact on violent crime; due to this – we can infer that Problem-Orientated policing would be more effective in solving knife crime. Reports by the College of Policing have supported this, by arguing that the ‘most effective methods to cure knife crime are multi-agency and multi-faceted’. Although the general effects of community policing include a more secure and safe community for citizens, this can’t guarantee a stronger deterrence in preventing the use of offensive weapons. By combatting the root cause of an issue, this creates a permanent impact on a wider group of individuals – whereas, the legitimacy gained from private citizens contributing to local policing, only creates a sense of security and doesn’t directly combat the issue itself. Evidence from McNeill and Wheeler demonstrates this: ‘educational attainment is lower for children with knife possession offences, which has been shown to be a risk marker for serious violence later in life’. It also combats a multitude of reasons as to why knife crime could potentially occur, such as, ‘Self protection and fear (‘defensive weapon carrying’), Self-presentation, particularly for individuals who want ‘street credibility’ and Utility (offensive weapon carrying). However, community policing is not as effective at tackling these specific issues, whereas community policing is much more successful in getting offensive weapons out of circulation. Case studies such as Operation Ceasefire and its splinter projects are also key evidence as to demonstrating why a problem-focused approach will be useful and provide a solid incentive and argument as to how a tailored-approach to specific crime issues would be incredibly effective at tackling knife crime. Other criticisms of community policing come into effective when debating which approach is more successful, such as the lack of power held by private citizens to actually contribute meaningful, and large scale impacts to knife crime specifically. The approach is fundamentally more useful when looking at more subdued and less violent crime issues, such as antisocial behaviour. For these reasons, most police constabularies have began using Problem-Orientated policing, when tackling knife crime as an issue in their area.

In the late 1960s, with an increase in crime rates and a growing dissatisfaction with police effectiveness, academics and other experts on policing called for newer and innovative practices in policing. The model at the time, which would later become known as the “standard” or “professional” model, represented the long-standing traditional aspects of policing. These strategies were generally reactive in nature and focused primarily on the enforcement of law. For instance, since police response time to a crime scene was seen as a key indicator of police department efficacy, increasing the number of patrol cars and finding other methods of decreasing response time were seen as primary solutions. Such strategies often led to agencies becoming more concerned with logistical efficiencies rather than their impact on safety as a whole. In the standard model, police departments were quite insular, having little need for collaboration with other community groups or institutions. Furthermore, police departments used similar strategies of enforcement across differing geographies and demographics. They derived their legitimacy through enforcement power rather than increasing rapport and respect through mutual connections with the community. Powers to detain and arrest, granted by the letter of the law, was their primary method to prevent and control crime (Weisburd & Eck, 2004).

One of the early implementations to diversify strategies of policing came was a program in the state of New Jersey called the Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. It was funded by the state as part of its comprehensive Safe and Clean Neighborhoods program. The hypothesis for the experiment was that shifting patrol officers from their cars to foot patrol would connect them more tightly to their specific neighborhoods. The hope was that officers on foot would get to know both the residents and business owners during their routine daily patrols. They would learn not only who the trouble-makers were, they would also gain familiarity with the neighborhood’s unique culture. Having such close ties with all of the inhabitants (residents, business owners, adolescents, etc.) minimized the longstanding the one-size-fits-all method of policing. Police officers could use greater discretion in their patrols because of their familiarity with the inhabitants (Kelling, 1981).

An extensive report was written by George Kelling (1981) for the Police Foundation describing the results of increased foot patrols in the Newark neighborhoods. One of the surprising findings of the experiment was that bringing patrol officers out of their automobiles and onto the streets did not actually decrease the crime rate in those neighborhoods. What it did, however, was decrease the perception of crime in those areas amongst the residents and business owners by bringing a sense of order and immediacy to managing crime-related problems. Officers targeted minor infractions such as loitering, panhandling, and prostitution, because it was believed these frequent and visible crimes created a sense of pervasive disorder. As a result of the consistent enforcement from foot patrol officers, meaning increased summonses and citations, law-offenders knew which lines they could and could not cross. For instance, “Drunks and addicts could sit on the stoops, but could not lie down. People could drink on side streets, but not at the main intersection” (Kelling & Wilson, 1982, para. 8).

A second finding from study became known as the broken window effect. Later described in an Atlantic magazine article by the author of the report, the social psychology theory stated that if one broken window was left unrepaired in a building, it attracted further vandalism and soon other windows would also get broken. In other words, maintaining the perception that the neighborhood was well patrolled, and that criminal behavior was immediately dealt with led to residents to feeling safer. The foot patrol officers also disrupted noncriminal behavior such as loitering and panhandling. This meant they were more comfortable walking the streets, shopping at local businesses, and spending more time outdoors. Philip Zimbardo, the noted Stanford social psychologist, created an experiment that reproduced the effect. He left an automobile in a Bronx neighborhood with its hood up and license plates removed. He hypothesized that its abandoned appearance would attract further vandalism, and it did. Within minutes passersby began to remove other parts and further destroy the car. Across the country, in Palo Alto, California, Zimbardo left a similar car on the street but this one had no signs of abandonment (hood closed and with license plates). The car remained untouched in California for an entire week until the researcher smashed its windshield. Similar to the results in the Bronx, once windshield was broken and the car showed signs of abandonment, passersby in California also destroyed the car over the following days (Kelling & Wilson, 1982).

In terms of race, little was mentioned in the report from Kelling (1981). Race was not a substantive finding or consideration between police and residents. In fact, it was only noted in the follow-up Atlantic article that although the majority of police officers were white and the neighborhoods they patrolled in Newark were predominantly African American, residents and believed the “function of the police was performed to the general satisfaction of both parties” (Kelling & Wilson, 1982, para. 6). However, in the coming years, policing based on the broken windows theory would be widely criticized particularly because of its disproportionate impact on citizens of color.

One of the most visible proponents of the broken windows theory was NYPD Police Commissioner William Bratton. By the mid-1990s, the NYPD had instituted policies that increased enforcement of misdemeanor crimes, similar to the strategy that Newark foot patrol officers used. In the year 2000, NYPD officers had made 51,267 arrests for smoking marijuana in public view, abbreviated at MPV. As a comparison, in 1994, there were only 1,851—an increase of 2,670 percent. African Americans and Hispanics were disproportionately affected. While each group made up about 25 percent of the city’s population, they accounted for 52 and 32 percent of MPV arrestees for the years 2000-2003 (Harcourt & Ludwig, 2007).

Analyzing data from earlier research by Golub, Johnson, and Dunlap (2007), Harcourt and Ludwig (2007) found no evidence that arrests for MPV could be associated with reduced violence or property crimes in New York City. Given the dramatic racial disparity for MPV arrests, NYPD would have needed to believe that such unfairness could be justified by the larger societal goal of reducing marijuana consumption overall, but there was no evidence that these two minority groups were the majority consumers of marijuana. Additionally, believing that these marijuana-related arrests reduced overall crime ignored the fact that other substances such as alcohol and cocaine are more highly correlated with violent or criminal behavior (Harcourt & Ludwig, 2007).

Endorsed by the federal government through legislation called the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Acton of 1994. Created the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services to manage funding and reported on progress.

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) of the U.S. Department of Justice defines community policing as “a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime” (***, p. 3). It is typically implemented through three strategies: community partnerships, organizational transformation, and problem solving.

According to statistics from a Police Foundation survey as far back as 1997, each of the police departments serving populations over 100,000 who responded to the survey all reported incorporating community policing principles. Although this statistic appears to make community policing quite pervasive, the research tells a different story.

There have been numerous studies of individual programs over the years, but few studies exist comparing specific aspects of programs to each other. Part of the reason for this is the lack of consistent implementation given the many variables that potentially may be included within a department’s adoption of the framework. Given that there has been a governmental office (COPS) funding much of these initiatives, it is surprising that more research does not exist (Gill, Weisburd, Telep, Vitter and Bennett (2014).

Results of a recent study by Braga, Brunson and Drakulich (2019) indicate that stronger analysis of crime data is needed to better inform policing policies and practices. The authors describe the “policing paradox” where residents in impoverished areas, often of color, feel both under-policed as well as over-policed. Disproportionate crime statistics in those areas call for increased police presence yet their residents’ longstanding history of mistreatment by police make them more likely to resist police involvement.

The authors not that it is particularly problematic to label entire neighborhoods as troubled when data shows that small numbers of frequent offenders are responsible for the majority of crime. (Thurman, Reisig, 1996)

References

1. Braga, A., Brunson, R., Drakulich, K. (2019) — pdf
2. Community Policing Defined (COPS Office) (PDF) ISBN: 978-1-935676-06-5
3. Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vitter, Z., & Bennett, T. (2014). Community-oriented policing to reduce crime, disorder and fear and increase satisfaction and legitimacy among citizens: A systematic review. Journal of experimental criminology, 10(4), 399-428.
4. Golub, A., Johnson, B. D., & Dunlap, E. (2007). The race/ethnicity disparity in misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City. Criminology & public policy, 6(1), 131-164.
5. Harcourt, B. E., & Ludwig, J. (2007). Reefer madness: Broken windows policing and misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City, 1989–2000. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(1), 165-181
6. Kerley, K., Benson, M., (2000) Does Community-Oriented Policing Help Build Stronger Communites? Police Quarterly Vol 3 No 1 p.46-69
7. Kelling, G., & Wilson, J. (1982). Broken windows. Atlantic monthly, 249(3), 29-38. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/
8. Kelling, G., (1981). The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. Washington, DC: Police Foundation https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/144273499-The-Newark-Foot-Patrol-Experiment.pdf
9. Kelling, G. L., Pate, A. M., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: A technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
10. Article defining community oriented policing https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/prevention-focused-community-policing/?ref=58372f7c6dbed1fb489784049926497f

Throughout of the course taken this semester (CJ311) there has been quite a bit of discussion on crime and exactly what are the moral principles that come into play when crime happens. Over the past 19 years, ever since the massive terrorist attack that happened in our country, there has been rising of concerns and questions. The concern is personal liberty has diminished in the face of personal safety and the question following that is with the concern of personal safety has it redefined the understanding of what is considered acceptable for criminal investigation tactics used by law enforcement. Today, there is going to be explanation on the impact changes that have happened in criminal investigation techniques and the methods that community policing may have. Also, criminal prosecution and the ability of major crimes being investigated by police.

In todays society, people are quite aware of terrorism and how homeland security’s concerns have redefined the acceptable tactics of investigation that is being used by law enforcement. Americans concern for personal liberty and personal protection should maintained at a balance. Concerns are continuing to rise from the public about their sense of security.

When it comes to the relation between officers and the community it is a major concern for law enforcement. Without the help from community’s police will find it challenging because police want to be able to trust those within the communities, they want to be able to find or have cooperating witnesses. If police cannot get this from their community it may lead to leaving police with fear. Without the help and support from the community’s, police would not be able to do their jobs. Without the help and support the police would be taken over by the communities because there is simply not may police officers. With the demand from the government and police agencies are having a difficult time with the tactics that are put in place, which can lead to an issue. It could possibly cause things to get out of hand, but possibly not happen if checked on. As tactics harshen, the trust from the public will start to fade and as mentioned earlier making police officers jobs a bit harder.

When it comes to effective investigative tactics used on criminal procedures, they seem to be quite similar to police community relations. However, when it comes to investigators, they need to be able to find more evidence, because the more evidence collected the high there is for investigators to have a winning case. Now when it comes to the court process there are safeguards that are put in place to protect defendants. With policy implements such as the Exclusionary Rule, the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment; these are put in place to help protect defendants’ rights. Police have now become more restricted in the way they preform at their job.

Defendants’ rights during a trial “have several constitutional rights including the remaining silent, confront witness, the right to have a public trial, the right to have a jury, the right to have a speedy trial, be represented by an attorney, and lastly, not be tried twice for the same offence” (Criminal Defendants’ Rights, n.d.).

Lasty, how do the changes in investigative techniques and methods affect the ability of police to investigate major crimes? As mentioned in the previous paragraph defendants during trial they have benefits and protection, because of this it may make investigators job a bit more complex. Not only that, but investigators are already trying to find the perpetrator (which is already difficult), they are also trying to gather evidence against the perpetrator. Which causes them trying to accomplish their case a difficult way. But with the new developments of the Patriot Act police agencies are able to have more leeway in the apprehension of terrorism. Which makes law enforcements job a bit easier.

The modern era of American policing

In 1751 America’s first paid police department started in the city of Philadelphia, unlike London’s bow street runners that started in 1749, the Philly department was more organized. Throughout history law enforcement officers have had the upmost respect from the public, they made the streets safer for the public. There was a time back in police history where officers would have casual conversations with those they had arrested, because they were a part of the community still even though they had committed a crime. In this time in policing, things are so much different, the general public have such a negative stigma about law enforcement officers in their head that it does not matter who the officer is, they are immediately judged on the actions of another.

Social turning points in the development of policing

In the past 20 years America has experienced many turning points for law enforcement officers. Including the most popular, ‘’Black Lives Matter’’ movement that started in 2013. This group believes that black people are being racially targeted by law enforcement. As we all know that this is not true, this group speaks up every time there is a law enforcement officer to black person shooting or injury. Surprising thing is, they mainly only say something if it is a white officer to black person, they hardly ever protest the black officer to black person. For many departments, they are trying out a style of policing called ‘’community policing’’. Community policing is more proactive in nature and tends to give the public more trust in you as an officer, as explained here, ‘’Intended to prevent crime before it happens rather than responding to crime after it occurs, Focuses on creating a safe social environment, Engages residents to determine which criminal activities they are most affected by, creating an accurate law enforcement priority list shaped by the people who live in the area, Encourages residents to participate with law enforcement in order to keep their own community safe’’ (Lortz, 2016).

What is the future of policing?

I believe that the future of policing is community policing. I believe that we as officers need to work towards being more proactive instead of reactive. If officers had to retrain in certain areas such as OWI and drug recognition more often, maybe we would be able to stop more accidents before they happen. I’m sure most people will complain that I am even suggesting more training, but it’s when we think we know it all is when we get complacent. Also, on the lines of community policing, I was told in my academy that my backup might be 10 minutes out when I call out shots fired and sometimes the only people that are going to be there to help me will be the community I serve. That guy I ticketed for speeding last week might save my life one day, it’s all about being respectful to one another especially as a police officer. In this article here it describes how an officer was in an fight with a person, ends up taking a bullet to the neck, and just when he thinks it is all over someone steps in and saves the day, ‘’A former felon, he would later learn. A man who turned his life around and found God. A lifelong hunter who begged a judge to reinstate his rights, allowing him to carry a gun again — the one he just fired’’ (Kravarik and Elam, 2017).

Introduction to Conventional Policing and Community Policing

Advancements in conventional policing have strengths and weaknesses. Policing is being strengthened with active crime prevention. Commitments to community policing and flexibility see adaptations within the police force when addressing evolving crime. Proactive conventional policing is based on traditional police practice, with the addition of technological advancements in intelligence-led policing. Operational tactics and organisational structures are changing current crime control philosophy and police practice.

This essay will discuss various issues surrounding the strengths and weaknesses attributed to the primary process and benefits in advancement models of policing. The main subtopics of the essay will be rapid advancements in conventional policing, including patrol & rapid response, legal authority and constraints, police activity research, challenges to standard model policing and foot patrol police. The limitations of conventional policing, strategic shifts in operational police practice, community policing, advanced techniques & systems integrate, with advanced models of hot spot policing, third party policing, recruitment management and leadership with evidence, examples and comparing the contrast from different perspectives.

I hypothesise that conventional police practice has a proactive focus on crime prevention. Conventional police practice and organisations all have strengths and weaknesses, but overall are proactive in advancing towards better more efficient and reliable consistency of policing.

The integration of traditional policing strategies of effectiveness and efficiency are combined with advancements in contemporary police practice to reduce crime.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Standard Policing Model

The standard model of policing is the basics from which today’s conventional police force has been formed. The process of rapid advancements is strengthening the process of policing, seeing increased benefits within conventional policing. Weisburd & Eck’s (2004) stated that police typology is two dimensional, diversity of approach and level of focus. The standard model strategies of the traditional policing approaches to dealing with the crime were mainly developed during the reform or professional era in the 1930s; the standards are the strength and basis of the conventional police force ( Kelling & Moore 1998). The standard policing weakness lacks empirical support; instead, the focus should be on police practice that is tailored and expanded beyond standardisation within law enforcement would be more beneficial (Sherman 1997).

Patrol and Rapid Response: Backbone of Contemporary Policing

Patrol and rapid response are an integral element of contemporary policing. Patrol is the backbone of policing (Walker 1977). With advancements in technology stations and beats have 24/7 geographical coverage. The community sees strength in numbers with more visibility of police in uniforms, police cars and foot patrols. Rapids response is covered through call centres triage system. The triage system is operated by highly trained personal, which strengthens rapid response times.

Reactive policing is essential, but a balance of police strategy needs to be considered and assessed by police agencies (Drew & Prenzler 2015). The classical theory of crime deterrence is by certainty, severity, swiftness of punishment and incapacitation. The standard model of patrol policing includes investigating, traffic policing, emergency assistance and management, missing persons, court security, risky evictions, death notices, random breath testing and dragnets and licensing checks. In conventional police CCTV surveillance is beneficial for society, tracking people’s movements, credit card analysis and travel movements. The negative of CCTV surveillance is that people feel like their privacy is being invaded. Riot police and police rescue are highly trained to be dispersed in situations where beat police need extra assistance to keep the community safe.

Legal Authority and Constraints in Policing

Legal authority and constraints are an ongoing debate, strengthen police authority using more restraint or does more force reduce the community respect for the police? Police have the legal power to arrest citizens for indictable crimes using proportionate force. Specific police powers differ for each incident, in an accident or crime scene the police have the power to direct, stop suspects, search, question name and address if under reasonable suspicion (Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000). Police have the legal authority to constrain a suspect if an assault, for example, is committed. Legal authority and proportionate constraint strengthen and develops respect throughout the community.

Community satisfaction depends on perceived expectations to faster response times. Witness and victim statements consume police response times to solving crimes. Police science advancements and increasing data resource availability and saving time which is strengthening outcomes (Sullivan 2018).

Foot patrol outcomes do not show a reduction in crime; however, statistics show that people feel safer if they see police around. Optimising patrols through crew sizes, shift lengths, triage priorities, reduced public expectations, delaying responses to none critical call outs, offload of non-core tasks and prevention of false alarms would see a better outcome (Ratcliffe, Groff, Sorg & Haberman 2015). The limitations of conventional policing methods, including prevention patrols. Between calls for service, officers are expected to randomly cruise neighbourhoods doing prevention patrols to deter crime. Prevention patrols decrease citizens fears that the police are deterring offenders by their presence. While this may increase the public’s feeling of safety, research shows no significant difference in criminal activity when patrols are present.

The rapid response suggests that responding quickly to the scene of an incident increases the police’s ability to catch the offender. Victim assistance response is more accurate when information is received quickly after the crime was committed. Calls for service are dispatched quickly with new technology, which has improved response time (Kelling and Moore (1998).

In conventional police recruitment, it is not just size and strength that is taken into consideration. Strengths in conventional policing come from a better, more rounded recruitment process. Psychological tests, job analysis, integrity checks, higher education, equity & affirmative action, representative selection committees and civilianisation are all part of the recruitment criteria. Even with advancements in the recruitment process, police officers still need ongoing psychological checks. Proactive mental health support is a primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of policing (Adams, Stanwick & Marden 2002).

Strategic shifts in operational police practice come from politicians and the community; their reaction to crime is to increase police numbers. The police to population ratio is an objective measure to weather the police numbers are sufficient to fulfil the policing mandate (Drew & Prenzler 2010). A methodological and statistical rigour to understanding the addition of police numbers in reducing crimes rates is analysed in police data (Marvell & Moody 1996). Each additional police officer added to larger cities with an average population of 250,000 reduced the crime rate by 24 fewer crimes (Sherman 1997).

Weaknesses in conventional policing are represented by miscarriages of justice, negligent investigations, failure to prosecute, vindictive investigations/prosecutions, excessive/inadequate penalties and wrongful convictions. Low crime conviction rates in Australia of 4% crimes and imprisonment rate of 1% is not going to reduce recidivism (Mukherjee 1987).

Community Policing and Engagement

Positive effective reforms through community policing consultations and liaison officers in implementing policies and procedures for alternatives to arrest and detention. Community engagement and increased community and police safety through the reduction of escalating situations.

Advanced Techniques and Systems in Modern Policing

Advanced techniques & systems integrating mixed teams, multi-tasking and specialist agencies are at the forefront of the primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of policing. The primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models are developments in the modern technological era. Technological advancements for interviews are crucial; interviews are recorded with modern equipment which will preserve the evidence and case material long term, in case of cold cases or future evidence. Interviewing has ethical values and is completed with preparation, respect, non-coercive voice and assistance for welfare assistance if required. Advanced models of policing now include cold case units, independent forensic science units, independent forensic unit accreditation & auditing, media management, case auditing (quality control, criminal case review commissions, victim & witness communication and computer alerts for victim contacts (Drew & Prenzler 2015).

Contemporary police practice includes community policing, hot spot policing, third party policing and problem-orientated policing. Community policing strength is the relationship between procedural justice and police legitimacy, which reduces crime outcomes (Sherman & Eck 2002). Weaknesses of community policing are the agencies do not clearly understand expected outcomes. Community officers need to be more excepted by police; they are working to help them after all. Advanced models of problem-orientated policing (POP) is attributing to better analysis and problem-solving in repose to crime reduction outcomes (National Research Council 2004).

Advanced models of hot spot policing are one of the main processes which are currently being focused on to strengthen the police force. The fight against crime through hot spot policing has weaknesses in its approach. Spatial displacement is the main weakness or criticism observed from hot spot policing; the criminals move on to another area (Weisburd & Eck 2004). The strength of hot spot policing is employing officers to specific crime locations. Advanced models show that specific times of high crime concentration of police officers will reduce crimes committed.

Third-party policing builds on police development by adopting partnerships. Third-party policing is strengthening the police force through legal, civil and regulators, seeing a positive outcome specifically in controlling drugs, violent crime and youth associated problems (Mazerolle & Ransley 2006).

Investigating is prioritisation through a triage system are used in policing to utilise police resources effectively. Investigation of crime has become a formal and significant role in policing. The investigation detective units are a positive focus away from private prosecutions to recent prosecutions (Matassa & Newburn 2007). The strength in prosecuting crimes is due to the switch from civil law to modern criminal law. The weakness of detective investigation units is corruption, deterring honest police from applying to join the detective units.

Diversity and Accountability in Policing

Police diversity within diverse communities is often divided by race, ethnicity, location, social status and gender. The police are challenged to the task of egalitarian and being impartial. The subordinate statue can seem vulnerable, such as homeless people. The weakness is police oppression, a reoccurring problem amongst minority’s, for example, race riots. Racism and discrimination by police within communities show marginalised groups have less respect for police, as they feel targeted and reserve more attention. In the year 2000, an American survey concluded that support for police from white people was 64 per cent, but support from African Americans was only 37 per cent (Gabbidon & Greene p. 117, 2013). Improving and strengthening relationships between police and minority’s is coming from the formulation of respect and continuation of programs on both sides, community support and police training.

Recruitment management and leadership effectiveness are essential for conventional police reputation and functioning. Weaknesses occur when the wrong officers are selected for a specific police function which he or she is not trained for or has not got the will to authority to do the job correctly. With a large number of people applying for the police force the strength of officers both physically, psychological and educational makes the selection of recruits of a higher standard level (Kumar 2009). Effective human resource management contributes positively to advanced models of conventional policing.

Accountability and regulation are proactively adopting new systems and performance measures in conventional police practice. Weakness in accountability was seen throughout the 1980s with misconduct scandals. Strengthening accountability through new systems and performance criteria is controlling the process more proactively. Police are accountable when on duty and obliged to be responsible and liable.

Strengthening in regulations is seeing better control, management, compliance, mitigation, performance measures, standards, strategies and restraint within the conventional force (Prenzler 2019). The Australian Government Productivity Commission (2018) stated that on average of 82% of people were satisfied with police services and 74% of people agreed that police treat people fairly.

Attention to problems, issues, debates and conflicts occurs in various locations. Police organisations and security companies see threats and are calling for the Government to update protocol for dealing with new waves of crime. New policing powers of detention and questioning have also been given to the leading domestic security agency. The Australian Secret Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) and on occasions to the military, and policing functions and powers have been very broadly extended to local governments, infrastructure providers and providers of financial and private security services (Baldino 2007).

Counter-terrorism branches of the (AFP) now have a national counter-terrorism planning committee (McFarlane, 2007). (AFP) have broader new powers to respond to the domestic risk of terrorism through new legislation, powers, security, military response and surveillance techniques (Australian Federal Police 2001).

The primary process and benefits attributed to advanced models of conventional policing are being seen through innovative technological advancements. Most notably is information gathering through crime mapping, data mining, storage and retrieval systems and surveillance including CCTV, listening devices and satellites. These technologies are used in a range of information-dependent tactics such as problem oriented policing and intelligence-led policing. Technology is a primary tool, both for information gathering and intelligence systems for surveillance and for analysis in COMP STAT, risk assessment tools.

Conclusion: Evaluating the Progress in Policing

In concluding the standard model of policing strengths benefit from increased visibility which is a general deterrence of crime through foot patrols and motorised patrols. Support systems for victims and families are provided through follow up investigations, for example, a domestic violence case. Weaknesses include the risk of racial profiling and lack of community involvement. Strategic programs are strengthening police approaches to crime with technological advancements leading the way for the future through intelligence surveillance.

The effectiveness of how constabularies deal with violent crime, particularly knife crime, has become a controversial subject in recent years – public ideas on how such issues should be tackled have evolved over time. Traditional principles of violent crime prevention were to apprehend law-breakers and hold them accountable for the crimes they had committed (Wilson and McLaren, 1977). Methods such as preventative control and rapid response, were useful in this approach, however, as the limits of these methods began to become recognised, police experimented with new methods of dealing with these issues. Recently, policing has become open to broader concepts of crime prevention, becoming more interested in anticipating crime as opposed to dealing with it, post-event. Proactive and regulatory efforts have been made to deal with violent crime, such as knife crime, as opposed to strictly reactive methods. This lead to the development of Problem-Orientated Policing and Community Policing. Both of these approaches aim to tackle offending in a prescient fashion, however, have key differences.

Problem-Oriented Policing emerged in 1979, after University of Wisconsin professor, Herman Goldstein, coined the term. During this time, a broader understanding among leading criminologists had emerged that crime was more of a by-product of larger social forces and that police, in themselves, had a lower impact on the rate of crime than once believed (Hirschmi and Gottfredson, 1999. As the public idea that police were ‘crime fighters’ had less relevance in actual practise. ‘Traditional’ policing had seen that varying levels of preventative control didn’t actually reduce crime rates and that rapid response had become ill-effective, due to the lack of crimes that were reported mid-event – and therefore, did not increase the probability of arrest and follow-up investigations only lead to sparse convictions. Goldstein challenged police policy with Problem-Orientated Policing. This approach aims to identify the wider, socially-ingrained causes as to why crimes occur and frame solutions to these issues using the S.A.R.A model. Police must systematically respond to recurring issues and gather information and design approaches to prevent crime at its root cause. Goldstein stated that the problem solving approach required ‘identifying these problems in more precise terms, researching each problem, documenting the nature of the current police response, assessing its adequacy and the adequacy of existing authority and resources, engaging in a broad exploration of alternatives to present responses, weighing the merits of these alternatives, and choosing among them.’

When looking specifically at knife crime, Problem-Orientated Policing has been used in many areas of the UK. In April 2019, Home Secretary Sajid Javid, revealed plans for a ‘radical blueprint’ for dealing with knife crime by ‘bringing together “education, health, social services, housing, youth and social workers” together to help support vulnerable young people who could be at risk.’ Proposals have also been backed by the Metropolitan Police, to bring in a new legal duty for front-line education, hospital, and police force workers to report all ‘warning signs’ of knife crime among young people. Research from the College Of Policing, demonstrates that given the range of motivation for knife crime to individually occur, tailored approaches such as ‘problem-oriented policing, focused deterrence strategies which target high risk offenders, and early preventative work aimed at supporting potentially ‘at-risk’ individuals’.

Becky Clarke et al found that a succession of harms endured by young people should ‘act as a warning’ against direct, rapid and ‘knee jerk’ reactions to knife crime. Social harms can include difficult financial climates, gang violence and rising political hostility – and these can often be the undertone or root causes as to why knife crime can occur. Drawing on the work of Goldstein, many experts argue that policing simply is not enough to prevent these crimes from occurring and that preventative action would be more effective by combatting the issues head on, as opposed to just dealing with the individual crimes. The impact of ‘knee-jerk’ reactions can not only cause a further and deeper rift in the relationship between the police and the wider community, but potentially inspire a spike in the crime that is attempting to be combatted , as a retaliation against the police, or the wider institutional system that the police make up – that they believe is causing them the ‘social harms’ in the first instance. By combatting the social harm at its root cause, supporters of problem-orientated policing argue that by taking a ‘social worker’ approach to the issue, the understanding between the community and the local authorities would improve and see a diminishment of the recurring crime issue. Jackson (2016) argues that there is one ‘fundamental problem’ with only focusing on the initial crime – he argues that ‘a crime has to be committed and someone victimised’ before action is taken. He argues that problem orientated policing – rather than allowing a person to suffer the consequences of a crime against them – diminishes the threat before the crime can take place, and by doing this, life-long change can be inspired into the individual and wider community.

When discussing the effectiveness of problem orientated policing against knife crime, Operation Ceasefire serves as a key piece of evidence. Operation Ceasefire, otherwise known as the ‘Boston Gun Project’, served as a problem-orientated initiative aimed at looking at the homicide victimisation within the youth community of Boston. The city experienced a large-scale, serious crime epidemic between the late 1980s and early 1990s. Crime statistics showed that the degree of homicide in ages 24 and under increased 230% during this time. Operation Ceasefire began meeting in the autumn of 1995 – the primary elements of this operation were a direct law-enforcement based offensive into the illicit trade and trafficking of firearms, moreover the supply of these same firearms to children and the systematic generation of deterrence and demoralisation of gang culture in youths. Analysis shows that this initiative had a direct, statistical impact on the rate of violent crime in Boston – with a 63 percent decrease in youth homicides, with the mean number of monthly counts of homicides in the area nearly halved post-test. This evidence is compelling when considering problem-orientated policing as a way to combat knife crime, simply due to the sheer success of this initiative and the splinter initiatives that it inspired across the US. Despite this operation mainly focusing on the distribution of firearms, we can assume that the success and nature of this problem-orientated approach is also palpable and applicable when looking at very similar violent crimes – of which knife crime is one – as the investigation focuses mainly on the causes of violent crime, as opposed to the offensive weapon physically used to commit the crime.

However, despite the optimistic perspectives to problem orientated policing, progress in implementing this has been slow and patchy (HMIC, 2000) due to the problem of policing being mainly ‘demand led’. The need to respond to calls quickly is a key part of the way the UK policies, as the crime rates seem to increase. The need to respond quickly to certain events, often means that officers have less time, and funding to analyse and find solutions.

The concept of community policing is based on the idea that police officers and private citizens can work together to help solve community issues surrounding crime and disorder. This is a type of policing that uses collaboration between private members of the public and the traditional policing system, to help maintain law and order. Wilson (2006) describes this as a way to “the public should be seen along with the police as ‘co producers of safety and order”- in the UK, this is approached using PCSOs, or Police Community Support Officers. These are members of the public that train with the police to do frontline work in their neighbourhood to prevent anti-social behaviour. Due to the collaborative nature of community policing, this is often perceived as ‘softer policing’ (Friedman 1992) – as this can often be oversimplified to ‘more foot-patrols’. Responsibilities include ‘defusing situations where conflict exists’, ‘fostering, supporting and building rapport’ and ‘responding to incidents that require police action, providing solution to low level incidents within their authority’ and ‘containing situations until relieved by a qualified Police Constable’ (National PCSO handbook, 2019).

Community policing is often seen as an effective way of dealing with knife crime as it is argued that it improved the perceived legitimacy of policing in that area. Perceived legitimacy is described by Rawls (1971), as the degree to which the criminal justice system within a particular society is seen to be legitimate or ‘just’ by the people who live within that society’ – and this gives citizens the opportunity to gain more control over the quality of life in their community. This has the potential to improve not only the relationship between the police and the wider community, but gives the police the understanding of residents needs. Research suggests that a stronger sense of perceived legitimacy predicts greater law abiding behaviour in the area, as people feel their needs and quality of life has been improved and therefore, less likely to commit crimes in that area. Community officer practises, such as stop and search, also provide a pivotal impact in reducing the amount of knives in circulation, and is the key tactic for community officers attempting to tackle knife crime in their area. Research from the Metropolitan Police shows that of all arrests made for the use of offensive weapons, over 80% of these resulted from a stop and search in 1999 (Fitzgerald). However, in 2017, only 14% out of 100% of arrests were for offensive weapons, which could demonstrate the effectiveness of stop and search and community policing as a tactic.

However, the stop and search tactic is a highly controversial subject, as many experts believe that it is an ineffective strategy when dealing with knife crime. A report written by the College of Policing posed that there is a ‘question around how stop and search should be assessed’. It argues that given ‘reasonable suspicion’ searches are investigative, the drop in crime that results from them is more of a by-product of the investigation, rather than a main objective or goal. The same study found that ‘if knife searches had been upped by 10% that month, then crime rates would be down by 0.1% per cent lower in week two and 0.3 percent lower in month 2.’ Although this did prove the effectiveness of stop and search overall, these connections are inconsistent and only provides limited evidence as to how stop and search implements successfully. One highly contested issue when discussing stop and searches is how it impacts community policing as a concept. Stop and search has also been criticized due to the history of systematic discrimination against people of minorities. The most totalitarian evidence of this emerged after the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, after the unlawful killing of a young black man that demonstrated racially motivated corruption in the investigating police force. This enquiry found that people of an ethnic minority were nearly nine times more likely to be investigated by a police officer than a Caucasian counterparts – this figure has nearly doubled since Lawrence’s murder in 1998. (Macpherson report). This has caused a mistrust of the police that Keeling (2018) described as something that affected ‘their willingness to cooperate with the police and, consequently, the police’s ability to carry out investigations and reduce crime.’ As Keeling describes, this may affect the police’s ability to carry out investigations and arrest people who may be at risk of committing knife crime, but could potentially increase the chances of people carrying knives for racially charged reasons, to feel safer in their community, due to the lack of security they feel they have gained from the police – despite most convictions in the UK for knife-related crimes (Ministry of Justice, 2017).

Despite this, community policing has had some very positive effects on the general quality of life of the communities surrounding it, and stop and searches make up a small percentage of this – so the question still remains as to whether the non-enforcement related interactions between the wider public and PCSOs can cause meaningful improvements into solving knife crime. A field experiment by Peyton et al found that a community-focused intervention in policing showed that of the participants in all pre-registered ethnic subgroups in the study, black respondents had an initial impact of ~11 scale points, nearly twice as large as the response from white and hispanic participants. This would prove that community policing, despite the overall mistrust of stop and search, has an overall positive impact on the community and how quality of life is affected. A Campbell study by Gill et al (2014) examined the impact of community policing as a whole tactic on how it affects crime and disorder and citizen satisfaction, Although the study found that it only had a relatively small impact on levels of violent crime in the short, it was associated with more significant impacts with citizen satisfaction and perceived legitimacy in the longer term. This is useful to solving knife crime as, people are far less likely to carry around knives as a form of self-protection, if they feel like the police are doing protecting in the first instance.

Both forms of modern policing come with significant benefits to the local community, however, have different levels of immediate impact on violent crime; due to this – we can infer that Problem-Orientated policing would be more effective in solving knife crime. Reports by the College of Policing have supported this, by arguing that the ‘most effective methods to cure knife crime are multi-agency and multi-faceted’. Although the general effects of community policing include a more secure and safe community for citizens, this can’t guarantee a stronger deterrence in preventing the use of offensive weapons. By combatting the root cause of an issue, this creates a permanent impact on a wider group of individuals – whereas, the legitimacy gained from private citizens contributing to local policing, only creates a sense of security and doesn’t directly combat the issue itself. Evidence from McNeill and Wheeler demonstrates this: ‘educational attainment is lower for children with knife possession offences, which has been shown to be a risk marker for serious violence later in life’. It also combats a multitude of reasons as to why knife crime could potentially occur, such as, ‘Self protection and fear (‘defensive weapon carrying’), Self-presentation, particularly for individuals who want ‘street credibility’ and Utility (offensive weapon carrying). However, community policing is not as effective at tackling these specific issues, whereas community policing is much more successful in getting offensive weapons out of circulation. Case studies such as Operation Ceasefire and its splinter projects are also key evidence as to demonstrating why a problem-focused approach will be useful and provide a solid incentive and argument as to how a tailored-approach to specific crime issues would be incredibly effective at tackling knife crime. Other criticisms of community policing come into effective when debating which approach is more successful, such as the lack of power held by private citizens to actually contribute meaningful, and large scale impacts to knife crime specifically. The approach is fundamentally more useful when looking at more subdued and less violent crime issues, such as antisocial behaviour. For these reasons, most police constabularies have began using Problem-Orientated policing, when tackling knife crime as an issue in their area.