What are the prevalent theories of corruption addressed in the textbook? Which theory makes the most sense to you and why? There are three prevalent theories of police corruption explained in the book. The first of these theories is the society at large theory brought to light by O. W. Wilson. This theory states that the society is to blame for police corruption. That people in the society would like the police to give them some special consideration and they give a gratuity for the good treatment. This in the long run would result into corruption. Criminals also would like the same favor be done to them and this is corruption.
Then there is the structural or affiliation theory. This theory was first presented by Arthur Niederhoffer. It states officers become indoctrinated into corruption by watching the actions of veterans and superiors. It says that police officers do not start out corruption, but thee straying behavior in the law enforcement field starts a corruption cycle. The theory also explains that corruption in the police would result from some parts of the systems being corrupt. For example if the police officer sees the judges being corrupt, they may opt to be corrupt also claiming that if the judge is corrupt, they can be corrupt also.
It also states that the corruption is encouraged in the secrecy in the police department. Everything is kept in secret and the citizens can not know what really goes on in the police department. The third theory of police corruption and the widely accepted theory is the rotten apple hypothesis. At states that police corruption is the result of putting into a policing position individuals with an already established propensity for corruption. The theory claims that poor training indiscriminative hiring and poor supervision erodes personal standards which ultimately result in widespread corruption within the department.
The theory requires that a good and strict guidelines be met and more training. (Walker, 2004) This theory of rotten apple hypothesis seems to be more practical than the other two as there is a reality past of it where people are not properly trained or guided or even fairly hired as this is what happens on the real world. Moral Careers What are the three levels of corruption? What is a “moral career” of a police officer? What is a “moral career” of an organization? How do moral careers progress? Is accepting a free cup of coffee the same thing, morally, as accepting graft from narcotics trafficking? Do you believe that one leads to another?
Should “grass eaters” be treated differently than “meat eaters”? Moral career of a police officer may be termed as the code of ethics where a police officer is supposed to behave morally upright in a situation which is corruption free and following the right or rather the expected moral values. This means that the officers would execute their duties in the rightful manner. Then there is the moral career of an organization. This is a case where the moral obligation of the organization is to see to it that it achieve its set goals and objective. A case where the organization seeks transparency in the activities that it conducts to the society.
This is governed by the rules and regulations in the organization. Moral career progress in an organization as the organization grows. People who are in the organization grow and they are seen or rather the organization is seen to have a good reputation. When an organization has good reputation, it tends to get people who are true and ready to work fairly without discrimination. (Walker, 2004) Accepting a cup of coffee is not the same thing morally as accepting graft from narcotic trafficking because narcotic drugs are seen to destroy the god moral of individuals compared to a cup of tea is morally accepted.
One may lead to the other as for example a person may offer a cup of tea and later require that some favor be done to them. Thus it can be said that one leads to the other. ‘Grass eaters’ should be treated the same as ‘meat eaters’ because by the end of the day, all of them will be required to something to eat and they depend on each other. Controlling Corruption Internally What should be done to control corruption internally? Does the attitude of the chief really make that much difference in a large or small organization? Do additional internal policies concerning corruption really matter?
How should internal affairs units be staffed and managed (specifically, how could you make this assignment more desirable)? How can the “Blue Curtain” be opened? Why does it exist? What other internal measures can police departments undertake to reduce corruption? Corruption should be controlled internally in an organization. First there should be a clear reason why there is a particular police department in corrupt then there should be proper measures taken such is the employment of qualified people in an organization. Also they should ensure that there is extensive training in the organization.
There should also be proper guidance in such organization. Transparency in the department offices should be ensured so that citizens can clearly see what is going on in the department. The top officials should ensure that they are free from corruption. The chiefs’ attitude makes much difference in an organization. This is because the officers who are under this chief will tend to emulate what he does and that if he is corrupt, they will end up being corrupt also. Thus, the behavior of a chief of an organization be it big or small is quite important in the handling of an organization activities.
This is because; there are the policies that an organization would prefer to follow and see to if that they achieve their set goal and objectives. An organization may be in a position to follow these set goals because they know all the strength and the weaknesses of the officers in it. Thus, it will be able to look for solutions and to implement policies that will help deal with their problems. (Walker, 2004) In the internal affairs unit, there should be set rules and regulations of conduct to see to it that all the organization members are catered for.
These should be a unit to foresee all the areas and conducts of individuals. There should be some motivators and awards for those who perform well in that organization this would help to improve the conduct of the parties involved. The blue curtain is an organization can be opened by letting these be transparency in an organization. This can be done by making it very clear that all the parties in an organization have their actions brought to light and that they can be explanations for some of the things that are happening in an organization.
This blue curtain exists sometimes because some of the officers involved in the act say corruption are high ranked and thus nothing can be done because they are the power itself. This means that there has to be silence all through as no one want to burst out the truth so as not to risk losing their job. And thus the blue curtain as they (officials involved) will try to explain the happening but still hide the whole truth. (Walker, 2004) Police department should undertake some other internal measures to reduce corruption.
Such measures are for example putting their top priority as to act in public interest. This would reduce their act or any attempt to engage in corruption. Also they should observe the principles of the codes of conduct that apply to their work. In these codes, corruption is prohibited. They should also adhere strictly to their rules and regulations and promote a culture of openness and transparency. There are some of the additional internal measures that should be taken to see to it that there is reduction of corruption in an organization(Walker, 2004)