The Use of Force for Police

Power has a variety of meaning and it is difficult to define. In the simplest concept, power can be define as power to or power over. This can be manifest in different ways with a relational precursor- meaning it a can only be ma infested when there is an a and b component, one has to exercise power and the other one has to abide power voluntarily or involuntarily. The government which is the overall governing body of a nation has an inherited power. This power entails the executive power, power by the representatives and power of the legislation.

In the third inherited power of the polity, the police get in to the picture. The police men’s role is to maintain the law and order and to enforce the law made by the legislation body of the government. To maintain the order means to inhibit disturbances and threats to the public. Every people maintain a variety of role depending on the social context where they are present. Police men are one of members of the society that maintain a role to their country and that is to secure the public as well as the state.

This role encompasses all of the other functions that they perform. One of the controversial functions that police men perform is their tasks for the criminal justice system. This pertains to the process of arrest, prosecution, trial sentencing, imprisonment, or probation and parole (Goldstein 1977). They were given the authority to implement these functions, but when there were difficult circumstances, likewise, when someone is being hostage, manifestation of these functions become problematic. Then the question of the rightness of the use of force follows.

In our constitution, it is indicated that the use of force is allowable defending on the state of the circumstance. Egon Bittner, in his paper entitled, “Florence Nightingale in Pursuit of Willie Sutton: A Theory of the Police”, states that “The police are empower and required to impose, or as the case, may be, coerce a provisional solution upon emergent problems without having to brook or defer to position of any kind, and that further, their competence to intervene extends to every in of emergency”. He explained the necessary use of force in emergency situations.

I mentioned about that the police role is to maintain security and to prevent threat to the people. This is the overall role of the police men that they must satisfy. As for the case of the use of force, I agree with Bittner but this time, it can be classified as function that they must do in order to facilitate the roles that they play. Although they are stereotyped as suspicious persons, assholes and know-nothing, their address is inherently attached with important responsibilities to the whole community (Van Maanen n. d).

Meanwhile roles may be conflicting in that some may perceive this role as irrelevant and out of context, thus making the people realize the rationality of their use of force is their dilemma. The citizens in a democratic country like US are entitled to their civil rights, hence,  in compromising instances, they are also at liberty to claim this right. Sometimes, there are circumstances were the role implementation of police is misunderstood.

I generally, agree that the presence of police is necessary and their continued existence is a proof that maintaining an order in a society without them is inevitable. They are socially useful in dealing with the problems of the society. Under the premise of authority and legitimate use of order, the use of force is lawful act and is accepted if we really adhere to peacefulness. The proper authorizing norm is provided by the criminal code, thus under extreme circumstances their act is absolutely legal.