Community_and_Problem_Solving_Policing

Community and Problem-Solving Policing | September 17 2010 | Introduction of thesis and topics, community policing, problem-solving policing, federal government’s integration into community policing, explanation of which type of policing you believe is more effective, conclusion. | CJS210 | There are two major theories regarding the best and most effective use of resources in the area of policing. The first of these is the relatively traditional problem-solving policing. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) This philosophy dictates that police organizations utilize their resources by reacting to trouble spots and incidents of criminal activity. This means officers tend to the places in communities that tend to have more crimes being committed in them than others. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) Beyond normal patrol resources, police agencies use task-forces and specialized sections to target problem areas (either geographically, or by crime category). (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) A more recent theory of policing is the community policing philosophy. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) This theory proceeds upon the notion that positive community relations and contacts are the best deterrent for crime. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) A problem in most police jurisdictions is that residents of areas most affected by crime are often the most distrustful of law enforcement. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) In the community-policing paradigm, resources are used in community outreach efforts to involve civilians in the act of patrolling and reporting crimes, and facilitating communication between community members and the police. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) Rather than targeting "trouble spots" with excess manpower and resources, the community policing philosophy is preventative in nature. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) It seeks to defuse high-crime circumstances before they become a policing crisis. (Goetz & Mitchell, 2003) As is often the case, an approach to policing that incorporates both of these philosophies is the most effective use of police resources. Problem-focused policing has the advantage of perceived and actual effectiveness. However; despite the high-profile successes of task forces, and concentrated patrol efforts, the overall efficacy of this method of policing is questionable. (Bayley & Shearing, 1996) First, though police forces incorporating this method spend 60% of their time on routine patrol, the perception (and complaint) within these departments is that they spend their days rushing to the location of call after call, many of which turn out not to be emergencies. (Bayley & Shearing, 1996) Such a consistently heightened state of reaction over a long period of time fosters the notion that police agencies are under-manned. (Bayley & Shearing, 1996) True or not, this perception can seriously undermine morale among law enforcement officers. Additionally, despite media and PR - driven efforts to highlight the successes of problem-based policing is exaggerated. (Bayley & Shearing, 1996) In the mid-1990s, when most jurisdictions used primarily problem-solving methodology, only about 21% of criminal investigation led to the charging of a suspect. When efforts were made against a particular crime or geographical area, the activity often relocated, rather than ceasing (Bayley & Shearing, 1996). The more recent, and "trendy" methodology for policing theory is the community-policing doctrines. One of the problems with this approach is the lack of a clear definition and protocol for its practice. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) Despite this fact, community policing has some elements that are common among practitioners. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) These include consultation with community groups regarding their security needs, identifying and mobilizing resources other than the police to see to the needs identified, and fixing the underlying causes of crime and insecurity with communities. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) While most policing agencies have integrated community-policing practices into their methodologies by the mid-1990s, it is unclear the extent to which this philosophy has contributed to the overall effectiveness of policing efforts. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) These are many complications involved in the institution of community policing philosophy. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) One such problem is the need for a different type of officer. The characteristics of openness and diplomacy are required of the community-police officer, as opposed to more technical skills which the experienced officers have. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) Since it is not feasible to turn over personnel in an entire department all at once, the transition to this type of policing must be gradual. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) The "new" type of officer is responsible for negotiating and designing policing practices in given neighborhoods. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) The need for autonomy and discretion among patrol officers in this paradigm severely stresses the usual military-style hierarchy upon which most police jurisdictions are based. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) Studies intended to assess the success of community policing have run afoul of methodological difficulties and have not produced consistent results. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) Logic points to some of the advantages of community policing: the increase of local information available to police through community outreach, the engendering of trust between law enforcement and the community, the better working conditions for officers who have developed a working relationship with the communities they patrol, and the sharing of work load by non-police agencies. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) By definition, the locally-based conditions of community policing make it difficult for the Federal government to integrate into these systems in any manner aside from the funding aspect. (Giankis & Davis, 1998) Large-scale overseeing of these types of programs runs counter to their purpose and doctrine. As a practical matter, in order to fully implement either of these policies, a jurisdiction would have to build a police force from scratch, and bend its organizational design to match one or the other of these theories. Since this is a practical impossibility, the best solution appears to be a interaction between traditional, community, and problem-oriented policing. As the circumstances dictate, command should allocate resources to promote a particular philosophy that is best suited for the given circumstances. They must be allowed within the power structure of the force to make and implement such decisions on an ad hoc basis. Reference Page Goetz, B. & Mitchell, R. (2003). "Community-Building and Reintegrative Approaches to Community Policing: The Case of Drug Control". Social Justice, Vol. 30, 2003.   Bayley, D. & Shearing, C. (1996) "The Future of Policing". Law & Society Review, Vol. 30, 1996. Giankis, G. & Davis, J. (1998) "Reinventing or Repackaging Public Services' The Case of Community-Oriented Policing". Public Administration Review, Vol. 58, 1998.