new 'policing' model

Upload: securelaw-ltd

Post on 30-May-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/14/2019 New 'Policing' Model

    1/3

  • 8/14/2019 New 'Policing' Model

    2/3

    SecureLaw Ltd. Phone: 312-423-670065 West Jackson Blvd., #112 Fax: 312-692-2322Chicago, IL. 60604-3598 www.securelaw.info Email: [email protected]

    The movement toward more cost effective policing strategies is best illustrated by

    the growing use of technologies, such as cameras, crime mapping, and interactivesoftware, designed to detect occurrences within the protected environment. For example,the Chicago Police Department is developing a networked system of cameras that willenable an officer in the squad car or in the dispatch center to monitor such diverseconditions as gunshots on street corners to unattended briefcases within a protectedfacility. Other cities around the country are using cameras for both crime deterrence andtraffic enforcement. Further, crime mapping techniques are becoming more predictive.Police administrators are directing tactical or saturation teams to certain locations toprevent the occurrence of likely crimessuch as robbery patterns or gang shootings.While these technologies and techniques are not perfect, they represent a quantum leap inthe crime fighting methods of policing agencies.

    Another innovation is to use alternative service providers designed tosupplement the service provision of policing agencies. Alternative service providers are,in essence, civilians who perform certain service functions; from parking enforcement tocrime scene security. These services are both cost effective, and they reduce the serviceprovisions required of sworn officers. While some of these tasks have long ago shiftedaway from sworn officers, there are growing indications that alternative service providerswill substantially increase.

    As the threator the realityof terrorism grows, so will the need for security.Using the past three years as an indicator, it is reasonable to presume that the impact of terrorism will continue to strain governmental budgets. This will result in continuedinnovation. Technology and tactical techniques will only go so far. Cameras on street

    corners may help deter criminals, but will they deter the committed terrorist? Tacticalpolice officers may help prevent the terrorist attack, but they cannot be everywhere.Consequently, what is needed are more eyes and ears on the public way.

    This could be accomplished by focusing sworn officers on tactical, lawenforcement functions, and shifting order maintenance functions to alternative serviceproviders. Two options for alternative service providers exist: either they are employedby government or by private firms. While space does not allow for a full treatment of these options, it is suffice to say that both will co-exist, but private firms will be thepreference. These para-police officers could perform many order maintenancefunctionson the public waythat public police officers are unable or unwilling toperform. These functions include controlling loitering, public drinking and rowdybehavior; providing street corner security in business or mixed commercial/ residentialdistricts; and responding to burglar alarm calls. These, and other such tasks, are criticalfor a secure, orderly environment.

    This will result in combining the traditional observe and report function of private security with the order maintenance role traditionally reserved for public police.Performing such functions in the public domain, however, raises important public safetyand public policy questions.

  • 8/14/2019 New 'Policing' Model

    3/3

    SecureLaw Ltd. Phone: 312-423-670065 West Jackson Blvd., #112 Fax: 312-692-2322Chicago, IL. 60604-3598 www.securelaw.info Email: [email protected]

    In this light, I conducted extensive research on privatized patrol arrangements.

    The research included riding in the patrol car, as the private police officers performedtheir duties. As one of the fewif not the firstinvestigator to perform such research, Ihad a birds eye view of this new policing model. This research demonstrated thatprivate police officers will perform many order maintenance, and even law enforcement,functions. It also demonstrated that constitutionally violative searches and seizures wouldoccur, and that questionable legal authority will complicate their patrol functions.

    This new policing model, therefore, may result in certain unintendedconsequences. It may create a tension between two critical principles: security andfreedom. Just as fear is driving the need for security, it may also trump the quest forindividual rights. In this sense, the desire for security will motivate people to hire privatepolice officers. If these officers are not adequately trained and skilled, theyre likely to

    violate our rights in the quest to keep us safe. In order to achieve the balance betweensecurity and rights, we must require higher levels of training, licensing standards,legitimatized legal authority, and more accountability. To do this will require regulations,and increased expenditures for these services. Consequently, the relationship between themoney expended and the services rendered creates a delicate balancing act. The optimalbalance can only be achieved in relative calm, as opposed to the face of fear.

    What seems certain is that the societal conditions influencing this new policingmodel are occurring. Its the perfect storm that cannot be stopped. We can only preparefor its arrival. Indeed, its already here. Most people simply have not detected it.Consequently, we may be drawing near to the goal of a police officer on every block.The definition of the police officer, however, may be expanded to include cameras and

    private security personnel. The time has come to redefine the nature of policing.

    James F. Pastor, 2004

    Author Note: This article was adapted from an article originally written in 2004 and published in CJ International under the title: Terrorism and Public Safety Policing. This article was subsequently postedon SecureLaw Ltd.s website in February 2010. For those readers who review this article, please think about the circumstances in 2004. Back then, would you have agreed with the premises in this article? Dothese premises seem more relevant today?