The Conflict Between Reformers And Politicians

Concepts like crime prevention, authority, professionalism and discretion have evolved in modern law enforcement since the twentieth century. August Vollmer instituted university training as a tool for young officers in training and under Vollmer’s teachings; O.W. Wilson pioneered the use of advanced training for officers and is also known for the start of criminal justice as an academic field. Wilson was also instrumental in applying modern management and administrative techniques to policing. Vollmer’s drive for educational innovations and improvements has changed policing tremendously and is still practiced heavily upon in today’s modern law enforcement society.

Policing today consists of three eras. These three eras have adapted and built off one another through history (Parr, 2014). The first era started around 1840 to 1930, and is known as the Political Era. The second Era is known as the Reform Era and lasted from 1930 to 1970. The last era is called the Community-Problem Solving Era and is still being adapted and used today. The Political Era emphasizes on meeting the needs of politicians. The police were given power through the local government and the community had very little say in what happened. The police and politicians worked together to control the city and neighborhoods (Palmiotto, 2000). This was often referred to as a ward. The ward politician controlled all the police in their neighborhood. The police officers tasks included not only crime prevention and order but a lot of social service activities that involved their neighborhoods. The officers resembled the ethnic backgrounds of the neighborhoods they lived and worked in and performed their patrols gaining trust from their community (Palmiotto, 2000). This allowed positive integration of police officers leading to more public service, and the trust of the officers to stop crime when is starts.

After reading the article titled, “The Challenge of Policing in a Democratic Society: A Personal Journey Toward Understanding” by Officer Charles H. Ramsey, I was able to relate with his view points and argument. In this article Ramsey, who was a sergeant for the Chicago Police Department discussed the core of ethics. His main example was the Holocaust in Europe during the 1930’s and 1940’s. Ramsey stated police officers worked together with the Nazi soldiers during this time and in return were not protecting their citizens. Similarly, when the police made no intervention to the killings and hangings of blacks in the south of the United States during the Civil War era.

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

After the civil war, local politicians rewarded their supporters with jobs as police officers. The officer were not trained and there was not a standard to become an officer. The are were event when entire departments were involved in misconduct and corruption. There was not much hope in this era because there was a lack of supervision that allowed officers to behave the way that they pleased. (Walker, Samuel, and Richards, M. 1996)

In order for a Police agency to prevent and deter Police misconduct, there must be a definition to what actions and behaviors that the term will encompass. The term ‘police corruption’ has been used to describe many activities: bribery; violence and brutality; fabrication and destruction of evidence; racism; favoritism or nepotism. Many different scholars differ in their own examples of the definition. Before attempting to the question of whether a precise definition is possible, it is worth examining the range of activities that might be included within a broad discussion of corruption. In (Bayley and Perito, 2011), it is defined as police corruption is a contested phrase with narrow and broad meanings. Narrowly

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.

Corruption within the New York Police Department is a quickly growing phenomenon; to an extent, this is largely due to the cop culture that encourages silence and draws the line at honesty. The good, honest officers are afraid to speak up against co-workers and in the process become corrupt themselves. When police departments were first established in the mid-nineteenth century, corruption quickly followed suit. It began with minor acts of misconduct and today deals with serious criminal activities. Scholars have noted that there is a strong correlation between the officers taking part in corrupt acts and officers wanting to fit in with the culture. In this paper, I argue that the deeper an officer in the New York police department gets into the police culture, the more likely it is that they become involved in narcotic corruption

Q1. Identify and explain the characteristics of political policing. Why did political policing develop in the United States? What do you think is the proper role of politics on policing? The political policing era was from 1840 to 1930. This policing era was due to the growing economic and social changes that came after the Industrial Revolution. Large established cities had a paid police force like New York in 1844. The officers wore uniforms and were paramilitary organized like today. This meant there was a rank system within the department. The department was also decentralized. By the late 1880s most cities had developed municipal police forces. County sheriffs stilled worked and provide policing in rural areas. Although, this seems like policing was starting to form a respectable practice, there were still many flaws in this era. There was no requirements for being recruited, minimal or no training, and no job security. Police were hired and fired at will. Police were also controlled by local politicians and considered a political reward. Police officers main goal in this time was to serve the reigning politicians in power. Officers often took many bribes to look away from moral crimes such as drinking, prostitution, and gambling. Police were dishonest and unlawful during this time. The Wickersham commission of 1929 was created to study the criminal justice system. The commission was devised by President Herbert Hoover. They found many inadequacies in the

The four eras of policing are political era, reform era, community era, and homeland security era. The political era was between 1840s and 1919 where police agencies were underdeveloped, decentralized, and disorganized in their mission, role, and function. Police organizations nationwide were exposed for their inability to maintain order, to control crime, or to fairly provide appropriate services. The reform era occurred between 1920s and 1970s where police was removed from the political arena and established them more as members of a centralized, professional organization formed for the public good. The primary role of police in this era had contributed to the problems crating negative police-community relations. The community era was between

     Law enforcement is divided into three major eras throughout history. These eras are the political era, the reform era and the community era. The political era that took place between 1840-1930 was characterized by five points, which was the authority was coming from politicians and the law, a broad social service function, decentralized organization, an intimate relationship with the

While the Reform Era worked to professionalize police, as society became more complex, so did the role of the police officer. The Community Policing Era was developed as a result of the need to develop cooperation and positive relationships between the police and public. What developed out of this era was an essential element of community policing – public accountability. Police officers became accountable to their supervisors who in turn became accountable to the community. Accountability can be seen as an honest evaluation of achievement based on clearly defined objectives. Many of these objectives are defined by complex community and social problems; as such police officers require the capacity and flexibility to work on them in a variety of styles and employing a variety of strategies.

Starting in the mid-1800s, there was a blast of metropolitan police offices in the United States. These early police divisions were composed around the area or ward-based political frameworks that commanded this period. It was the nearby neighborhood government official who gave initiative and oversight over a significantly decentralized arrangement of policing. Work choices inside police departments were made at the ward level, and occupations were allowed in light of an arrangement of political support. This framework compensated residents with police work in return for their reliability to the nearby ward government official who gave them the employment.

During this era citizens felt safer and had a better relationship with the police but as time went on and technology got better the relationship that was developed between police officers and citizens changed dramatically. By the mid-1900s new technology had a significant influence on policing, two-way radio, patrol cars and the telephones, revolutionized policing. “Police: History-Policing Twentieth Century America^ C” the Reform Era( n.d.)

Although police professionalism had many flaws for the time it was a progressive movement for several reasons. For one, police professionalism intended to move law enforcement into the future and change how police officers were viewed to a more positive light, but it failed in this aspect (Escobar, E. J., 2003, pg.176). Second, it was mean to reform the police in order to rid it od corrupt officers who took bribery from illegal institutions, and who extorted money from the community