• How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other
Jim Glennon said it best: “For law enforcement professionals, communication skills are the most important of all skills necessary to succeed in your profession.” Law enforcement officers today are confronted with daily challenges and one of those challenges in effective communication (“Effective Criminal Justice Communication”). Communication is a vital tool for law enforcement to perform their jobs (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Communication is used to speak with the public, relay information amongst themselves and to other agencies, screen suspects, to talk to dispatch and to request assistance (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012).
There is a solution out there ready to help us communicate effectively and proficiently for nearly every circumstance (Reyes, 2009). Clear, simple, and reliable communication is a critical element in the ability of public safety to react to an emergency situation in a timely, safe and effective form and is crucial to the future of the law …show more content…
enforcement profession (Estey, 2005). The everyday conversations that we have with our citizens and colleagues are the most important communications and conversations, yet they do not require advanced technologies or complex communication systems (Estey, 2005).
Since the start of the 1980’s law enforcement communications have advanced significantly.
An officer’s only sources of communication prior to new technology was the handheld radio (which was the size of a brick), car radio and any pay phone that could be found (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Today, the most commonly used law enforcement communication tool is a two way radio (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Law enforcement agencies throughout the United States were prompted, due to the 9/11 attacks, to upgrade their radio communications because of serious inefficiencies. Much like the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, it was obvious that no one in emergency response could communicate with one another. Noteworthy changes have occurred in numerous places, however there are still upgrades needed in many areas (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,”
2012).
The way law enforcement functions are conducted were changed by mobile data terminals in patrol vehicles (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Tremendous advancement has been made with the Mobile Data Terminals since the days of a huge, flashing green screen with restricted capabilities (Reyes, 2009). Details of a call for service and mapping are the basic components that the terminals offer (Reyes, 2009). This allows officers to see all the details of the call, incorporates call history at the location, and allows for turn-by-turn navigation (Reyes, 2009). With this technology, officers can check vehicle records, arrest warrant and to correspond with the dispatch office (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Very effective communication and critical data is available when needed at the fingertips of public safety personnel with the implementation of mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009). Accomplishments such as car-to-car communications to transmitting large data and files to virtual role call for those officers not attending briefings is allowed with the mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009). In an instant, officers in the field can access information in their agency’s database, and often other agency’s databases (Jerrard, 2010). Having data such as missing persons or high alert suspects accessible in patrol cars can speed up the apprehension of subjects (Jerrard, 2010). Broadband connectivity, which can be expensive with monthly charges for each terminal, is one of the greatest barriers for the mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009).
Another communication tool used by law enforcement is a smart phone. These help officers in a variety of ways, such as confirming information and keeping track of court appearances (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Some police departments are connected to a mobile data system, allowing officers to use their cell phones to access an individual’s records, such as warrants, when they are not near their patrol vehicle (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). This data is retrieved in real time (Jerrard, 2010).
On the other hand, as agencies adopt new technologies and equipment, they should not overlook that their achievements as law enforcement professionals are dependent upon their relationships (Estey, 2005). One of these relationships is between officers and dispatchers. Communications is imperative between officers and dispatchers. An officer’s mission on the street may not appear quite the same as the mission in dispatch, and be that as it may, they aren’t that far apart in their goals (Smith, 2013). They both are attempting to “protect and serve” (Smith, 2013). Dispatchers are an officer’s life line and their role is to inform them, keep track of them and help them stay safe (Smith, 2007).
Dispatch is a support function of the agency and most 911 centers are exceptionally chaotic (Smith, 2013). Dispatchers take the call, sort out what they can and get the information to the officer as quickly as possible (Smith, 2013). After calls, dispatch is frequently left out of the loop and they do not know the result of the call (Smith, 2007). It is important that a supervisor takes the lead in providing the dispatcher a short summary of a critical call they were involved in to provide them the much needed closure (Smith, 2013).
Often there is a love-hate relationship between officers and dispatchers and when things are going well, they love each other, but when they’re not, they temporarily hate each other (Smith, 2007). Nevertheless, dispatchers are frequently the key to an officer’s safe and successful outcome on calls (Smith, 2007). Kind words with dispatch go along way and can ease stress with dispatch, and in addition enhance dispatcher/officer relations (Smith, 2007).
Officers and dispatchers often don’t communicate well because they seem to be speaking two different languages (Smith, 2013). The culture on the street is very different than the culture in the dispatch center and agencies are sometimes hesitant to unite the two (Smith, 2013). To provide a foundation for good communications, dispatch ride alongs with patrol and officers dispatching should be mandatory (Smith, 2013).
Communication within the agency is critical; however, positive working relationships between agencies is needed to be most effective and efficient. To protect and serve the citizens of the community, agencies must have the capacity to communicate with each other (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,” 2008). In the 1980’s and 1990’s public safety agencies realized the benefits of communicating with other agencies (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,”2008). Innovative partnership projects began forming and developing in cities and states, resulting in shared communications and they found that new purchases were more cost effective when agencies cooperated (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,”2008). However, according to the National Institute of Justice, agencies are still having trouble communicating with each other because of incompatible and aging communications equipment, constrained finances, limited planning, lack of coordination and cooperation and limited radio spectrum (Hawkins, 2006).
Furthermore, terrorist attacks and natural disasters have expanded interoperability between agencies (Hawkins, 2006). Operability should be suited to support responses to all scales of emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). Incident response systems have been built to meet the daily public safety demands, as well as the more predictable emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). The National Incident Management System (NIMS) was introduced in March 2004 and it is a common set of concepts, principles, terminology and technology to improve emergency response with the NIMS Incident Command System (ICS) being used for large scale emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). The NIMS ICS system is based on common terminology and integrated communication for use by all agencies (Hawkins, 2006). Most agencies are federally required to be NIMS ICS compliant.
There is a solution out there ready to help us communicate effectively and proficiently for nearly every circumstance (Reyes, 2009). Clear, simple, and reliable communication is a critical element in the ability of public safety to react to an emergency situation in a timely, safe and effective form and is crucial to the future of the law …show more content…
enforcement profession (Estey, 2005). The everyday conversations that we have with our citizens and colleagues are the most important communications and conversations, yet they do not require advanced technologies or complex communication systems (Estey, 2005).
Since the start of the 1980’s law enforcement communications have advanced significantly.
An officer’s only sources of communication prior to new technology was the handheld radio (which was the size of a brick), car radio and any pay phone that could be found (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Today, the most commonly used law enforcement communication tool is a two way radio (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Law enforcement agencies throughout the United States were prompted, due to the 9/11 attacks, to upgrade their radio communications because of serious inefficiencies. Much like the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, it was obvious that no one in emergency response could communicate with one another. Noteworthy changes have occurred in numerous places, however there are still upgrades needed in many areas (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,”
2012).
The way law enforcement functions are conducted were changed by mobile data terminals in patrol vehicles (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Tremendous advancement has been made with the Mobile Data Terminals since the days of a huge, flashing green screen with restricted capabilities (Reyes, 2009). Details of a call for service and mapping are the basic components that the terminals offer (Reyes, 2009). This allows officers to see all the details of the call, incorporates call history at the location, and allows for turn-by-turn navigation (Reyes, 2009). With this technology, officers can check vehicle records, arrest warrant and to correspond with the dispatch office (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Very effective communication and critical data is available when needed at the fingertips of public safety personnel with the implementation of mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009). Accomplishments such as car-to-car communications to transmitting large data and files to virtual role call for those officers not attending briefings is allowed with the mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009). In an instant, officers in the field can access information in their agency’s database, and often other agency’s databases (Jerrard, 2010). Having data such as missing persons or high alert suspects accessible in patrol cars can speed up the apprehension of subjects (Jerrard, 2010). Broadband connectivity, which can be expensive with monthly charges for each terminal, is one of the greatest barriers for the mobile data terminals (Reyes, 2009).
Another communication tool used by law enforcement is a smart phone. These help officers in a variety of ways, such as confirming information and keeping track of court appearances (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). Some police departments are connected to a mobile data system, allowing officers to use their cell phones to access an individual’s records, such as warrants, when they are not near their patrol vehicle (“How Does Law Enforcement Communicate With Each Other,” 2012). This data is retrieved in real time (Jerrard, 2010).
On the other hand, as agencies adopt new technologies and equipment, they should not overlook that their achievements as law enforcement professionals are dependent upon their relationships (Estey, 2005). One of these relationships is between officers and dispatchers. Communications is imperative between officers and dispatchers. An officer’s mission on the street may not appear quite the same as the mission in dispatch, and be that as it may, they aren’t that far apart in their goals (Smith, 2013). They both are attempting to “protect and serve” (Smith, 2013). Dispatchers are an officer’s life line and their role is to inform them, keep track of them and help them stay safe (Smith, 2007).
Dispatch is a support function of the agency and most 911 centers are exceptionally chaotic (Smith, 2013). Dispatchers take the call, sort out what they can and get the information to the officer as quickly as possible (Smith, 2013). After calls, dispatch is frequently left out of the loop and they do not know the result of the call (Smith, 2007). It is important that a supervisor takes the lead in providing the dispatcher a short summary of a critical call they were involved in to provide them the much needed closure (Smith, 2013).
Often there is a love-hate relationship between officers and dispatchers and when things are going well, they love each other, but when they’re not, they temporarily hate each other (Smith, 2007). Nevertheless, dispatchers are frequently the key to an officer’s safe and successful outcome on calls (Smith, 2007). Kind words with dispatch go along way and can ease stress with dispatch, and in addition enhance dispatcher/officer relations (Smith, 2007).
Officers and dispatchers often don’t communicate well because they seem to be speaking two different languages (Smith, 2013). The culture on the street is very different than the culture in the dispatch center and agencies are sometimes hesitant to unite the two (Smith, 2013). To provide a foundation for good communications, dispatch ride alongs with patrol and officers dispatching should be mandatory (Smith, 2013).
Communication within the agency is critical; however, positive working relationships between agencies is needed to be most effective and efficient. To protect and serve the citizens of the community, agencies must have the capacity to communicate with each other (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,” 2008). In the 1980’s and 1990’s public safety agencies realized the benefits of communicating with other agencies (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,”2008). Innovative partnership projects began forming and developing in cities and states, resulting in shared communications and they found that new purchases were more cost effective when agencies cooperated (“Effective Police Communication Systems Require New Governance,”2008). However, according to the National Institute of Justice, agencies are still having trouble communicating with each other because of incompatible and aging communications equipment, constrained finances, limited planning, lack of coordination and cooperation and limited radio spectrum (Hawkins, 2006).
Furthermore, terrorist attacks and natural disasters have expanded interoperability between agencies (Hawkins, 2006). Operability should be suited to support responses to all scales of emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). Incident response systems have been built to meet the daily public safety demands, as well as the more predictable emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). The National Incident Management System (NIMS) was introduced in March 2004 and it is a common set of concepts, principles, terminology and technology to improve emergency response with the NIMS Incident Command System (ICS) being used for large scale emergencies (Hawkins, 2006). The NIMS ICS system is based on common terminology and integrated communication for use by all agencies (Hawkins, 2006). Most agencies are federally required to be NIMS ICS compliant.