The Use Of Technology And Officer Education

Policing is a very difficult, complex and dynamic field of endeavor that is always evolves as hard lessons teach us what we need to know about what works and what don’t work. There are three different Era’s in America’s policing: The Political Era, The Reform Era, and The Community Problem Solving Era. A lot has changed in the way that policing works over the years in the United States.

Community relations also play a major role in the modernization of policing. The interactions among different police departments and communities allow for effective policing. Many of Vollmer’s ideas came from his associates, from police experiences in other countries, and from academic sources. Vollmer recognized the potential of these ideas and unified them into a working whole, using his energy and dedication to set a pattern for police reform that continues to this day.

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.

Community Policing took a different perspective on crime than August Vollmer. It shows that even though police officers are trained and respond to crimes on time, it doesn’t effect the crime rates. In the past foot-patrol was in place but it quickly failed due to poor management and not enough funds for the program (Bohm & Haley, 2014, Pg. 147). Community Policing was an idea to form a bond between the police and the citizens. If the police paid more attention to the minor problems in

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)

Community policing has evolved to be the most used strategy for policing. “It is an approach to crime detection and prevention that provides police officers and supervisors with new tools for addressing recurrent problems that plague communities and consume a majority of police agency time and resources” (Peak, 2012, 65). It has been defined by various people differently. But all the definitions have similar principles (Chappell, 2009). They focus on proactive problem solving and create relationships with the community to address any issue that may arise. Community policing is a combination of client-oriented and problem-oriented policing.

Plus, the concept of problem-oriented policing involves interaction with the public just as community policing does. So where is the difference? POP emphasizes on research more than any other aspect of policing. Not only is it a strategy, but it is also an approach to policing in which distinct parts of police business are subject to “microscopic examination” in hopes that what is learned about each problem will lead to discovering a new and more effective strategy for dealing with it (Goldstein, 2001). This all started in the late 1970’s (circa the beginning of community policing) when researchers, police professionals, and policymakers became interested in improving the efficiency of policing. Their research uncovered these findings: “(1) police deal with a range of community problems, many of which are not strictly criminal in nature, (2) arrest and prosecution alone—the traditional functions of the criminal justice system—do not always effectively resolve problems, (3) giving the officers, who have great insight into community problems, the discretion to design solutions is extremely valuable to solving the problems, (4) police can use a variety of methods to redress recurrent problems, and (5) the community values police involvement in non-criminal problems and recognizes the contribution the

The Philadelphia Police Department faced many issues due to Prohibition, not only within the city of Philadelphia but also within the Police Department itself. During Prohibition, Police Officers were considered such a necessity that the Police Academy was shut down by the director of public safety in order to get more law enforcement out on the streets. Following the issues regarding Prohibition, corruption was common and members of the Police Department were held accountable for their actions. Just as corruption was common, as was a notable issue of racism between the citizens and officers. Many made known the fact that the Police Department was primarily a ‘white-male institution.’ Throughout the many problems the Philadelphia Police Department faced, it continually served to be the law enforcement of the city of Philadelphia.

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.

Uchida detailed the beginning and progression of American policing in his article. Police departments were originally under the control of city governments and city officials and was heavily influenced by politics (Uchida, 2004, p. 12). Because of this political influence, there were no hiring or training standards. Elected officials would hire men that would agree to keep them in office and further their agenda with no regard for whether the men were the most qualified people to police (Uchida, 2004, p. 12). Politicians exchanged positions for political support and resources, resulting in an environment that fostered police misconduct and corruption. This system fostered loyalty to the person and/or party that helped the job-seeker acquire

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

     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.

August Vollmer was the police chief of Berkeley (CA) Police Department from 1905 to 1932. He served as the first professor of police administration at the University of Chicago from 1929 to 1930, and he was a professor of criminology at the University of California at Berkeley. He served for one year as the police chief of Los Angeles Police Department (1923-1924) and he was the President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police from 1921 to 1922. A progressive-minded chief and a key advocate for the police professionalization movement, Vollmer often held viewpoints that ran counter to many of his contemporary police chiefs. He was against police brutality and their use of the “third degree,” he opposed the death penalty,

With the on-going development of the United States throughout the 1900’s, the evolution of crime and the need to address it also continued to progress. New advances in technological equipment (and application) continued to spread throughout the country in all common areas of life. New ideas about crime and the way to successfully address would also need to take shape. August Vollmer was one of the key individuals that helped to develop and form the progress of the criminal justice system as we know it today (Wilson, 1953, p.97-100). August Vollmer was elected to the position of Marshal in the town of Berkeley at on April 10, 1905, and was later elected as the first Berkeley police chief on August 13, 1909 (Wilson, 1953, p.94). During his time at Berkeley, Vollmer utilized numerous methods for applying known, as well as new strategies in his police operations (Wilson, 1953, p.97). It has been widely recognized that August Vollmer has greatly contributed many different implementations of original training, techniques, and putting into practice the use of new technological equipment that has helped improve the criminal justice system not only in California but throughout the United States (Wilson, 1953, p.100-103). What are some of the ways Vollmer has contributed to the development of modern California law enforcement?