Based upon the articles by Allender and Cheurprakobkit (2004), describe the philosophy behind community policing. Why factors characterizing traditional policing led to the need for a new model? How does community policing fit into the era of terrorism and homeland security? Based upon the articles by Allender and Cheurprakobkit (2004), the philosophy of policing can be described as community partnerships, personalized, and problem-solving ingredients. Community partnership philosophy asserts that the most effective way of reducing community decay and disorder is through a collaborative relationship between the police and the community.
This broadened view recognizes that cooperation between the police and the public will give police greater access to information provided by the community, which in turn will lead the police to be more responsive to the community’s needs. It has a personalized philosophy since it is also characterized by consistently assigning officers to a particular neighborhood or geographic area. This strategy not only is intended to foster a sense of geographic responsibility but also is a means of holding officers accountable for what takes place in their beat. The third philosophy of community policing is problem solving.
Here, the police and the community engage in a cooperative effort to solve neighborhood problems. The factors characterizing traditional policing led to the need for a new model because these factors have led to a series of crises in policing. First, the police–community relations problems of the 1960s had created a crisis of legitimacy. Local police departments were isolated and alienated from important segments of the community, particularly racial and ethnic minority populations (Kelling & Moore, 1994). Second, recent research had undermined the assumptions of traditional police management and police reform.
Studies of the criminal investigation process raised doubts about the ability of the police to significantly increase the number of arrests. Furthermore, research showed that faster response time does not usually increase the likelihood of arrests. In short, the traditional reforms of more police, more patrol, more detectives, and faster response time were seen as not likely to improve policing. At the same time, the traditional police goal of providing an immediate response to all citizen calls for service, regardless of the nature of the call, burdened the police with an enormous workload.
Third, experts recognized that the police role is extremely complex, involving many different tasks and responsibilities. It was discovered that only a small part of police work was related to criminal law enforcement and that most police work involved order maintenance and service activities. As a consequence, experts recognized that if the police were to become more effective, they were going to have to broaden their characterization of police work from one that exclusively focused on crime control to one that also focused on such issues as community quality of life, order maintenance, and fear of crime.
Fourth, experts began to recognize the importance of citizens as coproducers of police services (Skogan & Antunes, 1996). The police depend on citizens to report crime and to request help in dealing with disorder. The decision to arrest is heavily influenced by the expressed preference for arrest on the part of a citizen. Successful prosecution of offenders depends heavily on the cooperation of victims and witnesses. Even more important, informal social control at the neighborhood level was increasingly recognized as the key to limiting crime and disorder.
In short, there was growing recognition that the police cannot control crime by themselves. Community policing has a proactive police role in the post in the era of terrorism and homeland security. The mission for state and local law enforcement after the September 11 terrorist attacks is the same as it has always been, to protect life and property. After September 11, the Department of Justice made combating terrorism one of its top priorities. The FBI began reorganizing in late 2001 with increased emphasis on counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and cybercrime.
But no one is better equipped to take the offensive than state and local law enforcement because no agency is closer to the community than its local police. Hence there should be a partnership between local departments and the FBI. The National Strategy for Homeland Security (2002, p. 56) calls for increased information sharing among law enforcement agencies. The reports say America will build a cooperative environment that enables sharing of essential information. It will be a “system of systems that can provide the right information to the right people at all times. ” This is an excellent idea in principle with community policing..
George L. Kelling and Mark H. Moore, “The Evolving Strategy of Policing,” Perspectives on Policing, no. 4 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1988), p. 8; The Economist. (12-22-01). “Homeland Security. ” Wesley G. Skogan and George E. Antunes, “Information, Apprehension, and Deterrence: Exploring the Limits of Police Productivity,” Journal of Criminal Justice 7 (Fall 1979): p. 232. A considerable amount of research has shown that tension exists between COP officers and officers still assigned to more traditional patrol functions. List and discuss some of the reasons for such tension.