Essay on August Vollmer's Career in Law Enforcement

Broderick, J. J. (1977). Police in a time of change. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

Many people know of the police officers of today’s world and that it is their job to enforce the laws set by their government, but not many people know the history of your typical everyday United States police officer or how they came about. The idea for neither your everyday police officer nor his or her department they work for or how a police department operates, originated in the United States. Over the years though America has made changes and adapted its system over the years to make it more suitable for its countries beliefs and practices.

Crime labs, lie detector test and fingerprinting are all very well known type of policing introduced by the Berkeley Police Department under August Vollmer. Vollmer’s enthusiasm for scientific lie detection was a natural outcome of his stand against the third degree, and he never lost faith that new breakthroughs would eventually correct the inadequacies that plagued the use

Chief Vollmer, known for being an innovative reformer, initiated much restructuring and reform during his one year with the LAPD. He completely reorganized the Department, improving working conditions, establishing new standards of professionalism, and laying the groundwork for what since has become today’s Scientific Investigation Division. He believed that scientific analysis of evidence had a place in police work, so Chief Vollmer ordered the formation of the first crime lab in the United States. The FBI crime laboratory was not established until seven years

The role of police officers is very significant to American history. Police work toward protecting citizens’ rights and helping America become the land of the free. The United States of America is built from the U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights and police play a major role in making sure American rights are met. Evolution has changed many of American history for the better; policing is part of those changes. As new issues in society arise, police must change and adapt to protect and serve the public.

In recent years and in light of recent tragedies, police actions, specifically police brutality, has come into view of a large, public and rather critical eye. The power to take life rests in the final stage of the criminal justice system. However, the controversy lies where due process does not. While the use of deadly force is defined and limited by departmental policies, it remains an act guided chiefly by the judgment of individual officers in pressure situations. (Goldkamp 1976, 169). Many current studies have emphasized the racial disparities in minority deaths, primarily black Americans, killed by police through means of deadly force. The history of occurrences reveals the forlorn truth that police reforms only receive attention in wake of highly publicized episodes of police misconduct. The notorious 1992 Los Angeles riots brought the matter to mass public attention and prompted improved law enforcement policy. Significant local reforms resulted, for instance, ending the policy of lifetime terms for police chiefs. Additionally, on a broader platform, in 1994, Congress approved provisions to the Crime Control Act in effort to tackle police abuse in a more structured way.

August Vollmer and his accomplices recommended training and education as two of the main components in professionalism in policing (Bohm & Haley, 2014). When Vollmer advocated for training he begun to hire more qualified and educated people that were able to perform the job more effectively. In the past, there were no requirements for individuals to start the job so the candidates weren’t fitting the job. Vollmer also wanted the politics and policing separated (Bohm & Haley, 2014). His reform was used to “to eliminate political influences, gain control of officers, and establish crime-fighting priorities” (Bohm & Haley, 2014, Pg. 147). Vollmer’s reform had a great impact on the department and made great changes such as: limiting the police functions to law enforcement related functions only, enforced

In recent years and in light of recent tragedies, police actions, specifically police brutality, has come into view of a large, public and rather critical eye. The power to take life rests in the final stage of the criminal justice system. However, the controversy lies where due process does not. While the use of deadly force is defined and limited by departmental policies, it remains an act guided chiefly by the judgment of individual officers in pressure situations. (Goldkamp 1976, 169). Many current studies have emphasized the racial disparities in minority deaths, primarily black Americans, killed by police through means of deadly force. The history of occurrences reveals the forlorn truth that police reforms only receive attention in wake of highly publicized episodes of police misconduct. The notorious 1992 Los Angeles riots brought the matter to mass public attention and prompted improved law enforcement policy. Significant local reforms resulted, for instance, ending the policy of lifetime terms for police chiefs. Additionally, on a broader platform, in 1994, Congress approved provisions to the Crime Control Act in effort to tackle police abuse in a more structured way.

First, between 1890 and 1930, the management of the police force was centralized. Virtually every decision had to go to the top for approval, with the goal of limiting the low-level officer’s exposure to temptation. To reinforce the hierarchy, specialized units were created to deal with such problems as drugs, youth, guns, and gangs. As Bratton described it, [The department] was divided into little fiefdoms, and some bureau chiefs didn’t even talk to each other…. Each bureau was like a silo: Information entered at the bottom and had to be delivered up the chain of command from one level to another until it reached the chief’s office.

America’s justice system has come a long way. It is because of the great leadership of our forefathers that brought us this far. There are several traits a great leader must exhibit, and one is innovation. Innovative leaders specifically in America’s criminal justice history and their actions, created the modern justice system that lives on today. This paper will profile one of the great leaders in American law enforcement history. It examines the leadership qualities that made Chief August Vollmer an influential leader. This paper will also discuss several events from his life that showcase his innovative traits.

When an officer of the law violates the law in which it enforces it creates mayhem and they lose the trust of the people. By obeying the laws just like the rest of the United States, they gain the social legitimacy that is needed in communities.

1. Identify and discuss the eight (8) recurring reasons that change occurs in law enforcement agencies.

An integral training of today’s police officers duties is the physical skill of the application of use of force. This is needed skill requirement to detain and arrest a person who has committed a crime and resisting. Police officers must be trained to use force properly when the skill is required on a subject who is resisting police officers efforts to place them under arrest. This skill has the potential for the officer to exceed the needed amount of force to place them under arrest that can lead to civil suits alleging the officer use of excessive force. Police use of force is a controversial topic with not only the community as well as leadership in the department. Concerns about excessive and unnecessary uses of force continue to require the researcher to locate what indicators police officers react to when the application of using force or threaten to use force.

Vollmer sought to eliminate the link between politics and police. He viewed policing as a profession, which is evident by some of the ideas he developed. Vollmer was the first to stress the need for police officers to have college degrees (Strock, 2007).

Police deviance is an unfortunate fact of life. What is the difference between misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance? To what extent does Plato's notion of the "tri-partite soul" help account for these misbehaviors?