In my opinion, I do agree with the statement that community policing has its respective successes as well as barriers when it comes to its acceptance in the law enforcement and in the community as a whole. This could be proven by the very purpose and corresponding imprecations of community policing in the United States of America. During the 1970s in the United States, community policing is defined as the short-term tactics that are implemented in order to address the issues that are related with police-minority relations. In relation to this, there are also other advantages in the application of community policing in America.
First, community police officers are closer to the people in the community, which would aid in effectively representing their norms. Second, community policing is also a means by which crime control is shared with the public that is somehow synonymous to neighborhood watch. Third, it is a good way to enhance the communication and relationship of the law enforcement with the public and interest groups (Fielding, 2002). On the other hand, there are also barriers when it comes to community policing and this could be largely attributed to the perception of the people and the way community policing is being implemented.
First, the main impediments in community policing in the United States is the view of the people that this is only a facade that tends to hide the reluctance of the law enforcement and other government officials when it comes to making substantial changes in patrol and investigation methods. Second, another criticism against community policing is directed towards their effectiveness. A study conducted shows that community policing is also not as effective as their beat patrol counterparts, which comes to a conclusion that community police officers and beat patrol officers are not reliable in preventing crimes (Fielding, 2002).
Some of the reasons behind such incompetence is the lack of support coming from high officials in the law enforcement. Third, another barrier in the effectiveness of community policing is the issue of racism wherein some community police officers are accused of having stereotypes and biases against minority groups. This is quite observable in states wherein racial discrimination is still largely observable (Persico, 2002). I believe that despite the barriers that are present in community policing, there are still ways in order to address these issues and enhance community policing in the United States.
In order to innovate and develop community policing, clear goals must be established in order to identify the intended purpose of community policing in a particular state. Some of the goals that community policing should focus on include increasing arrest, preventing opportunities for crime, or managing reported crime rates. These goals should also have its corresponding “foci” so that evaluation purpose would be easy. Furthermore, it would be also beneficial to have an independent body that will ensure that the community policing abides by the law of the country and it does not infringe upon the human rights of people (Fielding, 2002).
2) How do you believe the Supreme Court’s decisions related to Eighth Amendment questions will impact capital punishment? Include some case evidence to support your belief. The Eight Amendment of the United States Constitution stipulates, “Excessive bail shall not be requires, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (United States Constitution Online, 2009). In line with this, I also believe that the Supreme Court’s decision on cases related to the Eight Amendment plays an important role in the proper implementation of capital punishment.
This is proven by the development in the standardization of giving capital punishment that is observable in the various cases that the Supreme Court handled. In the case of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U. S. 238 (1972), the court decided that all kinds of capital punishment that existed during that time are against the Eight Amendment. On the other hand, the Furman Court believed that the infliction of death penalty did not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments. This is supported by the case of Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S.
153, 188 (1976) wherein the decision of the court recognized that the death penalty is a unique kind of punishment as compared with the other punishments that are imposed in the criminal justice system. Nevertheless, caution has also been discuss when it comes to implementing death penalty in order to make sure that it is used justifiably, as utilizing it could pose great risk (Blume and Olive, n. d. ). In my opinion, the development in having a viable criteria in properly sentencing someone with death penalty happened in the “twin objectives” that were tackled in the Furman Court.
The twin objectives are: “at once consistent and principled but also humane and sensible to the uniqueness of the individual” (Blume and Olive, n. d. ). In the case of Gregg v. Georgia, supra, together with its companion cases, the decisions of the Court asserted that the twin objectives are “best met by a system that provides for a bifurcated proceeding at which the sentencing authority is apprised of the information relevant to the imposition of sentence and provided with standards to guide its use of the information” (Blume and Olive, n. d. ).
Other Supreme Court decisions, together with these cases, paved the way for having a competent standard that serves as a basis for justifying the implementation of death penalty as a form of punishment that is not against the Eight Amendment. References Blume, J. H. , and Olive, M. E. (n. d. ). Introduction to the Eight Amendment. Retrieved July 5, 2009, from http://www. capdefnet. org/hat/contents /intro_to_8th/3_intro_to_8th. htm. Fielding, N. (2002). Community Policing. New York: Oxford University Press. Persico, N. (2002). Racial Profiling, Fairness, and Effectiveness of Policing. The American Economic Review, 92, 1472-1497.