|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
The role and function of police is typically understood as the activity of officers acting according to the law, departmental regulations and an occupational culture. These roles and functions are now expanding in order to incorporate, and be of advantage to, the community. The ideal model of policing has not yet been established thus suggesting that the public who the police serve continually have both positive and negative responses as to whether the police are satisfying their needs and requirements. The police can only do so much in terms of becoming more community based and this notion of keeping on-side with the public is also stressed by government. The community also see the police as being a law enforcing body, that is on call for pretty much any reason at all twenty-four hours per day. John Avery (1981) states that "the greater part of calls upon the police are for service, and the police have been regarded as the only social welfare organisation which is readily available after 5:30pm).
The public are an extremely powerful body that, politically can demand almost anything they want. It is then up to the government to assess these demands and choose to either implement change in order to maintain or gain the support of the public, or the government can choose to ignore the requests of the public which not uncommonly results in disputes and demonstrations. The police need the public to be 'on their side' in order to work effectively and efficiently. If the ties between these two powerful bodies break down then there is likely to be a rise in unreported criminal activities, hostility between bodies and a tremendous waste of tax payers' money. Some may say that the police exist to protect the fundamental freedom of all citizens but this cannot happen if both the police and public do not come to a compromise on the way how they both want to be treated. It has been shown that increased community involvement makes for a more effective police force and that the public's well being will be better protected.
The way in which the police conduct their duties are also determined by the government policy that is handed down to them. With the police being a part of the public sector, they are politically neutral and are seen only as the coercive arm of the state. When government policy is handed down, no matter how ridiculous or irrelevant it may be, the police have to adapt and enforce these changes in every circumstance. Government policy has an overwhelming influence on how the police will conduct their duties and how they will handle certain situations. If the government chooses for the police officers to become more forceful and demanding then a paramilitary style of policing would slowly come into practice thus resulting in a negative view of the public toward the government and police services. If however, the government sought to have all police to relax the application of their duties and treat certain types of offenders in a more easy going manner then we will again see public unrest with the likelihood of increased crime and pressure directed again at the government. The consent theory maintains that individuals are obliged to obey laws because they themselves consented voluntarily to the legal system which in turn suggests that the public have to abide by the government policing policy handed down for the police to enforce. However, the consent theory also states that governments govern with the consent of the people, and that this consent and sovereign power remains with the people which suggests that if the people are not happy with the way the government is handling certain situations then they have the right to protest and dispute the policies handed down. These members of parliament were originally elected by the people and thus the people can vote them out at the next election.
Indeed government policy certainly shapes the way in which our police force operates. It is this policy that either creates negative, positive or neutral aspects toward the public insofar as whether the police are seen to be succeeding with their operations. Police shootings in the early 90's sparked a row over the implementation of what policy to be introduced. The public displayed a negative approach toward the notion of police becoming 'trigger happy' and that alternative procedures such as spending more time calming down the victim or waiting for a psychologist to appear at the scene were being neglected. The police would argue that the shootings were justified on the grounds of great danger faced in each confrontation but this justification was not be enough for the public to accept that the police were exercising their right to shoot as a last resort. Public outcry in view of police shootings almost immediately called for a policy into which guns would be used only when all other appropriate actions have failed. Officer Mandy Hunter commented on the influence and criticism that the public had in creating a new policy which deterred police from reaching for their gun when ever they wanted, "You've only got to look at the level of public criticism levelled at police in relation to police shootings, to see what would happen if we went around Melbourne, guns blazing" (Koutsoukis, 1996:3). At this point in time the police were completely within their rights to shoot and kill when they saw it necessary. This notion came from the fact that "Law and Order has been a key policy for the Kennett Government"(Ryle,1996:4) which resulted in Premier Jeff Kennett (Victoria, Australia) giving the police extra powers by confirming his policy to the Commissioner of Police Mr. Neil Comrie that his officers had the right to fire. Not knowing what the intentions of the Kennett government were in giving the police more freedom to use excessive force which included the right to fire (ibid) but judging from the public response from these shootings then one can only assume that Premier Kennett's notion of law and order is either too harsh and demanding for society to handle or his policy was too easily justified by police with the drawing of a weapon in a quick and sudden manner which would enforce Mr. Kennett's view of keeping law and order. How the police choose to operate to enforce the law is entirely up to the government policies that have been handed down (Garmire, 1977:26).
Even though police discretion can be a major influence to how the police keep law and order, if the government is not happy with how the police are conducting their duties then the government has the power to take away or restrict the amount of constabulary independence that the government grants in the first place (ibid:28). If the government takes away police independence then society will experience more of a militaristic style of policing that would in all liklihood guarantee harsher treatment of the public. A harsher style of policing will only see an increase in resistance to police, crime and would better establish the notion of 'us against them' (Finnane,1994:59). The police need the support of the public in order to become more effective and efficient and so it would be unwise for the government to introduce policies that failed to create a better relationship between police and the public. If the police were to enforce the law in a negative manner then the public will cry out for change, and so if the public are not happy with the way the police conduct their operational duties then the government would most likely be willing to change. This confirms all ideas that government policy shapes the role and function of the police culture and it is these roles and functions that either create a more satisfied public which will be more willing in assisting police by reporting crime and giving information on crime rather than a frightened and revengeful public who would hinder police operations by not supporting or being interested in the police role because they think that they themselves will be a victim of unpopular police policy. The government quickly reacted to the public warnings by cracking down on the police procedures when in stand off type situations (Mckay,1996:3). The guns remained holstered and more effective measures were taken when dealing with crazed people who would be of danger to others and themselves. A more communicative approach of policing was stipulated by the government which included preventative measures when confronted with serious situations (ibid). Some of these preventative measures include temporary disabling agents such as capsicum spray, being more patient when dealing with difficult offenders and police and psychologists communicating more with the offender which would relax the offender into better understanding the possibilities that they face if they decide to release hostages or surrender themselves. If the police immediately pulled out their weapons, demanded for the offender to surrender or threatened the offender in any way then that offender would be more hostile toward the police and would resist the temptation of giving themselves up.
The public and the police would want the government to issue understandable policies that would not in any way jeopardise the police relationship with the public. Fair and just policies enable the police to enforce the law in a successful manner in term of keeping the ties with the community (Garmire 1977:140-142). These ties with the community guarantee a more effective and efficient police service which in the long run will prove to be successful in the solving of many crimes.
Community based policing would probably be the largest government policy handed down to the police commissioner. Community based policing includes the police officers to better understand what the community wants and act on their needs (Finnane 1994:10-14). The increase of visibility is one of the major factors in gaining community respect because they are seen more often patrolling public places. The increased presence within the city alone has increased dramatically and the police presence upon the transport system can only benefit the police relations with the community.
The whole idea of the notion behind community policing is to make the public realise that they the police are also human who are just trying to do their job by looking out for the needs of the community at large. Yet, the police officers cannot successfully achieve the policy given by the government to gain the respect of the people if the people are not totally satisfied with the role the police are playing in operational matters. So the police are trying to gain the respect of the public by better servicing their needs and in doing so the public will become more co-operative with the helping of police in criminal investigations. One huge push for this community involvement is the introduction of programs such as Crimestoppers. Other ways in which the police force are becoming more effective in the push for community policing is the presence of police information booths which can be mobile and are set up at crime scenes or they are permanently fixed like the booth in Flinder Street Station. These information booths are set up for the public to inquire about any instances or queries that the public may have.
Another measure that the police have taken in strengthening their community ties is that their transportation has changed to better serve the public in difficult areas. Bicycles are ridden at major sporting events, police golf buggies are driven up and down the city streets, horses are used and trained in busy streets and are present at demonstrations and rallies and the notion that more police are walking the beat in and around highly populated areas such as shopping centres and social events.
The policy of community based policing can not be stressed enough and any sensible measure will be attempted in order to gain public satisfaction and faith. Such measures include the forming of a jazz band which is seen frequently performing within the city centre and at major exhibitions. The shaving off of hair in order to raise money for charity is also another attempt to show the public that they are normal citizens who are wanting the help of the public in order to create a safer society by reducing and /or solving criminal activity. What the police are also trying to achieve is that they are not the enemy and their presence is to keep the public order and help those who are in need of police company.
This community based policing policy can only be successful if both the public and police understand each others motifs and desires (Bennett,1992:22). A style of policing that best serves the public and in return gains the police more informative leads is hard to achieve when outside factors including other government policies are put into action. The major outside factor that can continually ruin any police campaign is the media. At times the alliance between police and the media is one that can be described as one of mutual respect, and at worst as one of upmost denigration. This is especially the case if Ericson's evaluation of "two cultures of reporters" (1989:209) is considered. Comprised of an "inner circle", whose membership is drawn from the popular press and have developed close relations with individual police officers, sharing many sources of social and cultural affinity; and of the "outer circle" drawn from quality news outlets with a focus on procedural propriety, inefficiency and mismanagement (ibid:209-210). Thus the media can either influence the public into believing what is right and wrong within the police operating procedure.
There also may be other government policies that if introduced could see the stored faith of the community lost if implementation of outrageous policies were to occur. Such policies would see the police use their powers in a manner that has or has not been see before by the public. If the public loses faith in the intentions of the community based policing program then it would be a lot harder to restore the public's faith back into police operations.
The government is accountable to the people and within the government services lies the police force who are there to maintain public safety by enforcing the law. If the public do not like how the police are servicing the community then they will direct their complaints or demonstrations toward the government. The government need as many votes as they can grab so the government will almost immediately focus its attention on public demand. Therefore, the government controls the nature of the police by having government policies shape the roles and function of the police force. The success of these roles and functions lies upon if the public are satisfied with the police duties that have been introduced by the interpretation of government policy and therefore these roles and functions do have an effect on the relationship between the police and the community.
me your thoughts of this page