Robert Peel's Model Of Policing Essay
What is the difference between the military bureaucratic model implemented by Peel and the military-style model implemented by MacDonald?
While both, Sir Robert Peel, and John A. MacDonald’s policing styles have a very militaristic background that follow distinct organizational characteristics, they differ in terms of how their jobs got done. While I read from the article “Rethinking Police Governance, Culture, and Management”, it seemed to me that Robert Peel’s style of policing was an organization that got its power from cooperation with the community, police being accountable for their actions, and public consent. I feel that the statement "The police are the public and the public are the police." Explains fairly well what Robert Peel intended …show more content…
to accomplish. To eliminate much of the suspicion of police. The policing model implemented by John A. MacDonald, to me, seemed more like a force that controlled the population just by telling the community how it is, and didn’t worry about what kind of flack they might receive from the community for doing their jobs.
Why was each model implemented?
What were the policing needs at the time?
At the time, I think that the John A. MacDonald model, which was based off of the Irish constabulary, was used mainly to impose control over various regions to further colonial growth. This included the construction of our cross-country railroad system, stopping whiskey traders from crossing into our boarders, promote greater agricultural settlements and to aid in the process of settling the Natives on the reserve. All of this required security & stability that the early paramilitary RCMP could offer.
In terms of Sir Robert Peel and his model, it was implemented to offer the police administration in England things such as stability through creating a centralized, specialized organization. The police or “Bobbies” gained power, or respect in the community, because there was doubt and suspicion towards the police prior to this model.
To whom does each of the models suggest police should be held accountable?
With the Early RCMP, the model suggests that police are held accountable by the RCMP. Due to the many levels of rank within the organization, internal discipline is something that can be associated with a paramilitary operation. Internal discipline, and sophisticated civil service organization proved to be a well sought after model, and allowed for organizational growth throughout
Canada.
With Peel’s model of policing, I think it is a bit trickier. It was a paramilitary operation that values rules and rank, much like the other model. However, I think that the police were held accountable by the public. As I mentioned before, the statement “the police are the public and the public are the police.” To me, that sounds that Peel had a bigger plan. Even though there were actual police to deal with the actual crime fighting, society was required to take part in reducing crime as well. This meant developing a relationship with the police. This leads me to believe that because they are “one in the same” that the public would hold the police accountable.
Speculate as to the impact of each model on the culture of policing. In other words, how do you think each model would have wanted police to behave?
I think that with the early RCMP, The model that John A. MacDonald initiated, would want the police to be seen as “the law”. By that, I mean if an RCMP officer gave you direction, that was the way it was going to be done. I think that the model suggests that the police would be seen as a uniformed organization, they worked together to achieve a greater Canada.
With Peel’s model, I think that even though it was a very structured organization, the police were seen as one with the community. To me, it sounds like it was a more personable experience, one that promoted a more humble approach.
Given your understanding that subcultures are often an emotional response or reaction to the organizational culture, speculate as to what subculture might have developed in each of the models. In other words, what might the members of a subculture in each model complain about?
Within Canada, and the creation of the RCMP, I feel that there would be complaints regarding the way various subcultures of Canada are allowed to carry out traditions now that there is now a uniform organization watching over them. Alternatively, there can be complaints regarding how they police are doing their jobs. By this, I mean in terms of stepping over boundaries, and people feeling the police had too much power. Complaints can also be made due to how the police are held accountable for their actions. The public may feel that they should be dealt with publicly, as opposed to internally.
Which model would you suggest is more in keeping with today’s policing needs?
With today’s policing needs, I feel that the Sir Robert Peels model of policing might be more appropriate. In today’s age, people are becoming more and more distrusting of police officers, and their actions. I think this has to do with the fact that both the police, and public really only interact with one another when the police are called, which tends to be negative. Additionally, police now tend to over step their boundaries and get themselves in trouble with the public. In Robert Peel’s model, there was something that is referred to as the “Peelian Principles”. These were basically rules set out for officers to follow at that time. There is one in particular that I think is often forgotten by today’s law enforcement officers.
“Peelian Principle 7 - Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
If this model were to be reintroduced today, and these rules were to be followed, and enforced, I feel that police wouldn’t be targeted all the time, and seen so negatively. The reason for this, I feel is that the police wouldn’t be as power driven as they are currently, because they would be seen as one with the public as I have previously stated.
While both, Sir Robert Peel, and John A. MacDonald’s policing styles have a very militaristic background that follow distinct organizational characteristics, they differ in terms of how their jobs got done. While I read from the article “Rethinking Police Governance, Culture, and Management”, it seemed to me that Robert Peel’s style of policing was an organization that got its power from cooperation with the community, police being accountable for their actions, and public consent. I feel that the statement "The police are the public and the public are the police." Explains fairly well what Robert Peel intended …show more content…
to accomplish. To eliminate much of the suspicion of police. The policing model implemented by John A. MacDonald, to me, seemed more like a force that controlled the population just by telling the community how it is, and didn’t worry about what kind of flack they might receive from the community for doing their jobs.
Why was each model implemented?
What were the policing needs at the time?
At the time, I think that the John A. MacDonald model, which was based off of the Irish constabulary, was used mainly to impose control over various regions to further colonial growth. This included the construction of our cross-country railroad system, stopping whiskey traders from crossing into our boarders, promote greater agricultural settlements and to aid in the process of settling the Natives on the reserve. All of this required security & stability that the early paramilitary RCMP could offer.
In terms of Sir Robert Peel and his model, it was implemented to offer the police administration in England things such as stability through creating a centralized, specialized organization. The police or “Bobbies” gained power, or respect in the community, because there was doubt and suspicion towards the police prior to this model.
To whom does each of the models suggest police should be held accountable?
With the Early RCMP, the model suggests that police are held accountable by the RCMP. Due to the many levels of rank within the organization, internal discipline is something that can be associated with a paramilitary operation. Internal discipline, and sophisticated civil service organization proved to be a well sought after model, and allowed for organizational growth throughout
Canada.
With Peel’s model of policing, I think it is a bit trickier. It was a paramilitary operation that values rules and rank, much like the other model. However, I think that the police were held accountable by the public. As I mentioned before, the statement “the police are the public and the public are the police.” To me, that sounds that Peel had a bigger plan. Even though there were actual police to deal with the actual crime fighting, society was required to take part in reducing crime as well. This meant developing a relationship with the police. This leads me to believe that because they are “one in the same” that the public would hold the police accountable.
Speculate as to the impact of each model on the culture of policing. In other words, how do you think each model would have wanted police to behave?
I think that with the early RCMP, The model that John A. MacDonald initiated, would want the police to be seen as “the law”. By that, I mean if an RCMP officer gave you direction, that was the way it was going to be done. I think that the model suggests that the police would be seen as a uniformed organization, they worked together to achieve a greater Canada.
With Peel’s model, I think that even though it was a very structured organization, the police were seen as one with the community. To me, it sounds like it was a more personable experience, one that promoted a more humble approach.
Given your understanding that subcultures are often an emotional response or reaction to the organizational culture, speculate as to what subculture might have developed in each of the models. In other words, what might the members of a subculture in each model complain about?
Within Canada, and the creation of the RCMP, I feel that there would be complaints regarding the way various subcultures of Canada are allowed to carry out traditions now that there is now a uniform organization watching over them. Alternatively, there can be complaints regarding how they police are doing their jobs. By this, I mean in terms of stepping over boundaries, and people feeling the police had too much power. Complaints can also be made due to how the police are held accountable for their actions. The public may feel that they should be dealt with publicly, as opposed to internally.
Which model would you suggest is more in keeping with today’s policing needs?
With today’s policing needs, I feel that the Sir Robert Peels model of policing might be more appropriate. In today’s age, people are becoming more and more distrusting of police officers, and their actions. I think this has to do with the fact that both the police, and public really only interact with one another when the police are called, which tends to be negative. Additionally, police now tend to over step their boundaries and get themselves in trouble with the public. In Robert Peel’s model, there was something that is referred to as the “Peelian Principles”. These were basically rules set out for officers to follow at that time. There is one in particular that I think is often forgotten by today’s law enforcement officers.
“Peelian Principle 7 - Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
If this model were to be reintroduced today, and these rules were to be followed, and enforced, I feel that police wouldn’t be targeted all the time, and seen so negatively. The reason for this, I feel is that the police wouldn’t be as power driven as they are currently, because they would be seen as one with the public as I have previously stated.