Essentially, the police will base their use of assets in a manner to reduce crime by building ties within the community and having a presence in neighborhoods. This can be an effective method because many argue that seeing the police in an area a majority of the time deters criminals from acting in those areas. A downfall of the COP theory is that political influence can force a department to pool resources in an area where crime is not as prevalent in order to keep good relations with a major tax base. Often times the poorer neighborhoods do not feel as though they are receiving enough of a police presence. The contingency theory is based on the approach to achieve specific goals, such as crime control.
The overall purpose and meaning of this article is to send the message that police officers can play a unique part in disrupting the disorder process. If police officers focus on less serious crime and disorder of a neighborhood then serious crimes like felonies will not be able to surface as much. This is because the community will participate more and become more social, and they will develop their own set of rules. A main section of this article that I want to point out is the idea that foot patrol decreases crime rate. In the article it states that police officers didn’t like the idea of foot patrol too much but because they did it relationships with the community was formed and people were less afraid to go outside.
It sounds confusing but when people see a man with a gun, no matter what side of the law he is on, they will get intimidated and possibly fear him. Taking away this gun will give that man less power, but he will also gain the people’s respect. For a society with police and people to coexist peacefully without conflict, weapons should not be involved. This way, less crime will occur and police will be respected more. A real life example of this perfect world is England today.
The politicians and law enforcement agencies need to remember that the gangs must be targeted and attacked as a whole, and not to single out a certain individual within the group. Gangs have chapters or cells all over the U.S. and abroad. Gangs tend to center themselves under a strict “street code”, that if you break, or interrupt, usually leads to some sort of attack or even taking someone’s life. The main objectives of gangs is to set out to earn money, or to maintain some means of financial gain, to help aid the gang and its members for whatever they desire. The other most important goal of a gang is to gain turf.
Community policing is a type of policing that has the polcing woking with members of the community and having the community taking a more active role in crime contro and pervention. Community policing also differs from the traditional type of policing because instead of the traditional method of crime control the community oriented policing seek out to install a fear of crime, order mantence, and conflict resolution as their methods of policing. The idea that stems from this is that you will have members of the police force focusing on major crime while the community will take care of the smaller ones. Then the therory that if you stop the minor crimes from occuring could possibly lead to a decrease in major crimes comes into play, and that would be one of the benefits to having community policing. Community partnerships is another method used by police in order to ensure a good relationship with members of the general public.
Is it ethical or unethical…that is the question. First off, what is “professional courtesy?” In law enforcement professional courtesy is when an on-duty officer pulls over an off-duty or retired officer for some traffic violation and lets him go, by not issuing a ticket or arresting him. The central ideal behind this behavior is that cops have to stick together, to look out for each other. In a profession that yields little respect from the general public officers should support other officers, not try to bring them down. This subject has many perspectives however, and each officer, depending on his life experiences and personal values, feels differently about this ethical dilemma.
It is argued in this paper that gang membership is a logical response by young individuals to socio-economic factors beyond their control. It will also be discussed here that any reasonable answer to deter individuals from joining gangs must begin with the cooperation of schools, institutions and law enforcement agencies, and that the growing problem of gang membership is a societal one, and one that doesn’t merely involve gang members themselves. For the purposes of this paper, it is important to understand exactly what is considered a gang. Gangs are broadly defined as loose organizations of people who work together for anti-social, financial, and criminal efforts. In most cases, gangs are conducted by an individual leader or cabal of leadership.
When the truth is that they are just trying to keep you and the community safe. In this paper I’m going to discuss a few goals that the Criminal Justice System has to help make the world a safer place to live in. The main goal in the system is to protect the community. This can be some of the supporting information that people will use to try to say that local agencies are out to get them because they really don’t care about the community. Well I’m here to tell you that Police Officers do care because they are not working for the money as they don’t get paid enough for risking their life everyday to community a safe place.
It is labor for their community and to use the criminal for the purpose to help stop recidivism. This program can affect the society two way, one it can make some people afraid to walk when these criminals are out and about doing project that the city believe need. Second, some may want to watch the criminal all of the time to ensure that they do not fool around and not finish the work at
The designated smoke areas sounded like a good idea at first so that smokers would have specific places to smoke under certain rules. No one wants a dirty campus that can be caused by careless smokers that throw their cigarette butts all over campus. Non-smokers can be affected by second-hand smoke and also the health of certain students would be at risk. With this being said it would work better if people would follow the rules and stop being careless. An opposing view might say that a smoke-free campus is not a big issue to deal with.