Critical Issues Involved In Policing
Critical Issues Paper: Week Eight Assignment
CJS/210
09/18/2011
Critical Issues Paper: Week Eight Assignment
As outlined in the course syllabus for week eight this paper is going to focus in on critical issues involved in policing. I will first provide examples of technology involved in policing and how technology enhances or detracts from police organizations’ ability to function. Secondly, I will provide examples of less-than lethal weapons and how less-than lethal weapons affect policing in todays’ society. Last, I will show examples of dangers faced by police and how police organizations’ address these dangers.
Examples of technology used in policing and how technology enhances or detracts from police organizations’ ability to …show more content…
function.
Modern technology is changing the way police departments operate. Utilizing up-to-date equipment improves efficiency and effectiveness, greatly impacting officer safety. Imaging equipment, communications systems and Global Positioning System (GPS) devices are just a few examples of modern technology in policing today.
Photo enforcement systems supplement a department's efforts to reduce red-light violations and speeding.
Motion-sensitive cameras enable law enforcement officers to instantly observe criminals in action and covertly monitor nearly any location for crimes. Thermal-imaging cameras can detect heat from marijuana-growing operations. They can also be used to locate suspects.
On-board computer terminals with wireless capability give officers real-time access to information, database files and mapping systems.
Community policing, or variations of it, has become the national mantra of the American police. Throughout the United States, the language, symbolism, and programs of community policing have sprung up in urban, suburban, and even rural police departments. For more than 15 years and through at least one generation of police officers, community and problem-oriented policing have been advanced by their advocates as powerful organizing themes for an emergent style of public safety. How these themes have impacted American policing is yet uncertain. The range and complexity of programs associated with community and problem-oriented policing have often precluded systematic scientific investigation. Moreover, community and problem-oriented policing are themselves “moving targets”—changing and modifying themselves in what is an often turbulent environment for law enforcement. Despite claims and counterclaims, what we actually know about the efficiency and effectiveness of community and problem-oriented policing is rather small in comparison to what we do not know, although literature and practice in this arena are growing …show more content…
exponentially.
Examples of less than lethal weapons and how less than lethal weapons, affect policing in today’s society.
. Every day we see evidence of America as an increasingly violent society. Our acceptance of it grows as we bat not an eyelash at even heinous E crimes. We are not an uncaring society, but we simply do not know what to do. We cry for help from the police. We demand more officers are hired and beating the streets. Yet through these truly trying circumstances we failed to realize one thing, “police need help as well.” The pressure to add new less-than-lethal (LTL) weapons to the crime-fighting arsenal is tremendous. Attempts to produce solutions to the problem began more than 30 years ago, it was not until 1985 that the task was given new impetus. It was a landmark year for law enforcement: the Supreme Court ruled in Tennessee v. Gardner, that the use of deadly force to apprehend apparently unarmed, non-violent fleeing felons was unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. So the less than lethal concept took off and never looked back. Police officers on patrol were traditionally armed with a baton or pistol or both, and non-lethal methods of subduing an attacker centered on hand-fighting techniques such as Jujutsu and baton use. In the 1980s and 1990s officers began deploying non-lethal personal sidearm, such as pepper sprays, and eventually electroshock weapons such as Tasers, which were developed for use by police and also found a market in self-defense by
private citizens. However, these weapons were developed for non-lethal resolution of a one-on-one conflict. When police officers find themselves facing a violent individual or superior numbers, the level of potential danger is increased significantly. As a result, the police officer must quickly disable the attacker(s) and improve the likelihood of control. In these instances, compliance tools such as pepper spray and impact weapons may provide the necessary means for the police officer to control the situation. Unfortunately, as with any “weapon”, there is always the risk of causing death or serious bodily harm. Beanbags and other less-lethal impact weapons are believed to be responsible for the unintentional killings of at least 12 individuals in the United States and Canada over the past 20 years. Many more individuals have suffered serious injuries that include broken bones, brain injuries, damaged spleens and injured eyeballs. In some instances, the less-lethal weapon will never penetrate the skin but death nonetheless results. One such case was exemplified where an individual was killed after being struck in the throat by a beanbag projectile. In another instance, an individual was killed by a beanbag round after being struck in the chest. The non-penetrating round impacted the recipient’s sternum resulting in a fatal cardiac arrhythmia. In two other cases, individuals died after being hit in the chest with a projectile fired from an LTL weapon. The impact in both cases fractured ribs, resulting in internal hemorrhage and death (I James, 1997). Ideally, a less-lethal weapon will incapacitate the perceived threat to the officer while inflicting only minor injuries to the attacker. In this regard, the manufactures of less-lethal weaponry typically state that their products are accurate, safe and effective, if used properly. This would include discharging the weapon at a safe distance as well as having the less-lethal projectile strike the appropriate part of the human body. However, unlike “laboratory testing”, police personnel often deploy less-lethal weaponry under less-than-ideal circumstances, facing a variety of issues that include surroundings, weather, human stress and fatigue. Over time, police personnel have learned that the technological advances made by manufactures in the laboratory often require refinement and adaptive training. For example, the original “square” beanbag round consisted of a sack that was the size of a tea bag and filled with lead shot. Difficulty occurred in deploying the round, as there was no guarantee that the beanbag round would hit its intended target at the correct speed and with correct positioning. In some instances, the square beanbag would not unfurl in the correct manner upon discharge, at times resulting in the round impacting in a manner that would cause serious bodily harm or even death.
In summary, while beanbags and other less-lethal weaponry are not without controversy, it is important to emphasize that these weapons have saved dozens of lives since their inception into street policing in the 1960’s. Police personnel have been afforded with technology that has allowed them to intervene in potentially dangerous situations without placing their lives in immediate danger, thereby reducing police injuries and deaths. In most cases, suspects have been subdued and apprehended without being shot by the standard police issued firearm, thereby avoiding serious injuries and death. In other instances, police were forced to use their firearm in order to incapacitate a lethal threat, at times saving individuals from greater harm. Unfortunately, the present array of less-lethal weapons available to many operational police officers within North America is often limited to pepper spray or Tasers. There is a wide array of non-lethal weaponry currently available to meet the evolving needs of the front-line police officer, regardless of the police agency’s size. These additional less-lethal force weapons also need to become incorporated within operational policing, for the safety of the public and, for the safety of police.
Finally here are the examples of dangers faced by police and how police organizations address these dangers. . Police face dangers in all walks of life. Whether it's while patrolling, domestic situations, robberies, murders, homicides, police are always at risk of danger. They address these dangers by following protocol. They do what they are trained to do.
CJS/210
09/18/2011
Critical Issues Paper: Week Eight Assignment
As outlined in the course syllabus for week eight this paper is going to focus in on critical issues involved in policing. I will first provide examples of technology involved in policing and how technology enhances or detracts from police organizations’ ability to function. Secondly, I will provide examples of less-than lethal weapons and how less-than lethal weapons affect policing in todays’ society. Last, I will show examples of dangers faced by police and how police organizations’ address these dangers.
Examples of technology used in policing and how technology enhances or detracts from police organizations’ ability to …show more content…
function.
Modern technology is changing the way police departments operate. Utilizing up-to-date equipment improves efficiency and effectiveness, greatly impacting officer safety. Imaging equipment, communications systems and Global Positioning System (GPS) devices are just a few examples of modern technology in policing today.
Photo enforcement systems supplement a department's efforts to reduce red-light violations and speeding.
Motion-sensitive cameras enable law enforcement officers to instantly observe criminals in action and covertly monitor nearly any location for crimes. Thermal-imaging cameras can detect heat from marijuana-growing operations. They can also be used to locate suspects.
On-board computer terminals with wireless capability give officers real-time access to information, database files and mapping systems.
Community policing, or variations of it, has become the national mantra of the American police. Throughout the United States, the language, symbolism, and programs of community policing have sprung up in urban, suburban, and even rural police departments. For more than 15 years and through at least one generation of police officers, community and problem-oriented policing have been advanced by their advocates as powerful organizing themes for an emergent style of public safety. How these themes have impacted American policing is yet uncertain. The range and complexity of programs associated with community and problem-oriented policing have often precluded systematic scientific investigation. Moreover, community and problem-oriented policing are themselves “moving targets”—changing and modifying themselves in what is an often turbulent environment for law enforcement. Despite claims and counterclaims, what we actually know about the efficiency and effectiveness of community and problem-oriented policing is rather small in comparison to what we do not know, although literature and practice in this arena are growing …show more content…
exponentially.
Examples of less than lethal weapons and how less than lethal weapons, affect policing in today’s society.
. Every day we see evidence of America as an increasingly violent society. Our acceptance of it grows as we bat not an eyelash at even heinous E crimes. We are not an uncaring society, but we simply do not know what to do. We cry for help from the police. We demand more officers are hired and beating the streets. Yet through these truly trying circumstances we failed to realize one thing, “police need help as well.” The pressure to add new less-than-lethal (LTL) weapons to the crime-fighting arsenal is tremendous. Attempts to produce solutions to the problem began more than 30 years ago, it was not until 1985 that the task was given new impetus. It was a landmark year for law enforcement: the Supreme Court ruled in Tennessee v. Gardner, that the use of deadly force to apprehend apparently unarmed, non-violent fleeing felons was unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. So the less than lethal concept took off and never looked back. Police officers on patrol were traditionally armed with a baton or pistol or both, and non-lethal methods of subduing an attacker centered on hand-fighting techniques such as Jujutsu and baton use. In the 1980s and 1990s officers began deploying non-lethal personal sidearm, such as pepper sprays, and eventually electroshock weapons such as Tasers, which were developed for use by police and also found a market in self-defense by
private citizens. However, these weapons were developed for non-lethal resolution of a one-on-one conflict. When police officers find themselves facing a violent individual or superior numbers, the level of potential danger is increased significantly. As a result, the police officer must quickly disable the attacker(s) and improve the likelihood of control. In these instances, compliance tools such as pepper spray and impact weapons may provide the necessary means for the police officer to control the situation. Unfortunately, as with any “weapon”, there is always the risk of causing death or serious bodily harm. Beanbags and other less-lethal impact weapons are believed to be responsible for the unintentional killings of at least 12 individuals in the United States and Canada over the past 20 years. Many more individuals have suffered serious injuries that include broken bones, brain injuries, damaged spleens and injured eyeballs. In some instances, the less-lethal weapon will never penetrate the skin but death nonetheless results. One such case was exemplified where an individual was killed after being struck in the throat by a beanbag projectile. In another instance, an individual was killed by a beanbag round after being struck in the chest. The non-penetrating round impacted the recipient’s sternum resulting in a fatal cardiac arrhythmia. In two other cases, individuals died after being hit in the chest with a projectile fired from an LTL weapon. The impact in both cases fractured ribs, resulting in internal hemorrhage and death (I James, 1997). Ideally, a less-lethal weapon will incapacitate the perceived threat to the officer while inflicting only minor injuries to the attacker. In this regard, the manufactures of less-lethal weaponry typically state that their products are accurate, safe and effective, if used properly. This would include discharging the weapon at a safe distance as well as having the less-lethal projectile strike the appropriate part of the human body. However, unlike “laboratory testing”, police personnel often deploy less-lethal weaponry under less-than-ideal circumstances, facing a variety of issues that include surroundings, weather, human stress and fatigue. Over time, police personnel have learned that the technological advances made by manufactures in the laboratory often require refinement and adaptive training. For example, the original “square” beanbag round consisted of a sack that was the size of a tea bag and filled with lead shot. Difficulty occurred in deploying the round, as there was no guarantee that the beanbag round would hit its intended target at the correct speed and with correct positioning. In some instances, the square beanbag would not unfurl in the correct manner upon discharge, at times resulting in the round impacting in a manner that would cause serious bodily harm or even death.
In summary, while beanbags and other less-lethal weaponry are not without controversy, it is important to emphasize that these weapons have saved dozens of lives since their inception into street policing in the 1960’s. Police personnel have been afforded with technology that has allowed them to intervene in potentially dangerous situations without placing their lives in immediate danger, thereby reducing police injuries and deaths. In most cases, suspects have been subdued and apprehended without being shot by the standard police issued firearm, thereby avoiding serious injuries and death. In other instances, police were forced to use their firearm in order to incapacitate a lethal threat, at times saving individuals from greater harm. Unfortunately, the present array of less-lethal weapons available to many operational police officers within North America is often limited to pepper spray or Tasers. There is a wide array of non-lethal weaponry currently available to meet the evolving needs of the front-line police officer, regardless of the police agency’s size. These additional less-lethal force weapons also need to become incorporated within operational policing, for the safety of the public and, for the safety of police.
Finally here are the examples of dangers faced by police and how police organizations address these dangers. . Police face dangers in all walks of life. Whether it's while patrolling, domestic situations, robberies, murders, homicides, police are always at risk of danger. They address these dangers by following protocol. They do what they are trained to do.