The World of Policing

The world of policing is one of constant change. As far back as the early days of Peelian police philosophy the missions and goals of police departments have constantly been altered. In our diverse communities and cites worldwide we see police departments engaged in very different forms of policing. Even across the many jurisdictions that operate within our nation we see departments that run at the very opposite ends of the policing spectrum, with some acing in extreme public service roles and others involved in aggressive crime fighting ideologies. These different approaches are all based of what the police identifies as the needs of the community. As constant research is conducted in the field of policing, departments adopt new policies and programs. As new technologies arise they too are incorporated into law enforcement.

The New York City Police Department like any other department in the world is constantly changing and adapting its policies to conform to that of new technologies and trends in law enforcement. One of these policies that has been put into use in recent years has been that of a community policing initiative. Finding its roots in police-community relations policies of the 50's and 60's, community policing is a philosophy that seeks to form a partnership between the police and the community. Through this bond the community can fully identify its needs and work together with the police to battle crime as well as many other services that do not fall within the traditional roles of policing. All of this is aimed at taking a proactive approach to crime. Its basis is simply trying to work with the community to identify its problems and fixing them before they escalate or lead to crime. Community policing is far different than any other philosophy seen in policing.

Although throughout history, "there have been sporadic variations in the underpinnings of American law enforcement, its substantively has remained a legal-bureaucratic organization focusing on professional law enforcement (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003 p. 476)". This legal-bureaucratic set up of the American police department has it as an agency concerned with statistic and numbers. The outputs of policing that include number of arrests, volume of recovered property, number of citations issued, response times and the other stats of policing play a more important role than the end result of policing (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003). This view of law enforcement has led to the police filling a fully reactive role and not paying attention to the underlying problems that cause crime in an area. A more in depth view of community policing can show how it attempts to fulfill its proactive philosophy.

First, Community policing aims to broaden the function of the police. According to Gaines and Kappeler (2003), the police must move away from their traditional role as crime fighters. They should incorporate a much broader role that uses fear reduction and order maintenance. Gaines and Kappeler (2003) identify prior research that has shown that crime as a product of social conditions. These social conditions can be manipulated and changed by the quality of life and social conditions in an area. So in affect, the police cannot actually fight crime, they can really only fight the conditions that cause crime by maintaining order, and therefore "bettering" the social conditions in a community. As for the concept of fear reduction, Gaines and Kappeler (2003) point out the fact that fear has a far worse effect on a community than does a crime rate. The fear of crime causes people to stay in their homes, takes away commerce in an area, and causes psychological affects on people. Gaines and Kappeler further their finding here by identifying a little known fact-more often than not, people's fear of crime is not related to the crime rate in their area. Many programs that promote fear reduction also lead to the second step of community policing, which is citizen input.

In the past, the police have implemented programs that have involved the citizens of their area. However, these programs did not truly take into account the citizens needs. The programs involved in the police-community relations push of the 50's and 60's although paying attention to the community and its wants and needs, did not really fulfill them (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003). Community policing furthers the community's involvement in policing where these predecessors fell short. Departments involved in community policing programs use surveys, meeting and others tactics in order for the citizens to voice their cares and concerns (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003). This data that is taken can then be used to evaluate the publics perception of many facets of police work, including efficiency of programs and the publics perceived fear of crime. The goals and priorities of a department can then be molded and shaped according to the community's feelings. This system opens up two-way communication between the public and the police, which greatly differs from traditional professional models where the police "brass" dictate the programs and policies of the department (Gained and Kappeler, 2003).

The final concept philosophical dimension of community policing is that of neighborhood variation. This concept deals with the traditional way the police view their jurisdiction. The traditional professional model of policing forces officers to ignore discretion and police every neighborhood of their jurisdiction in the same way (Gaines and Kappeler). The shift that community policing implements in this area is that it identifies the various neighborhoods and areas of a political jurisdiction as separate and unique. These areas all have their own problems and expectations of the police. This way of looking at certain neighborhoods is really breaking it down to a community level. As Suttles (1972) points out, citizens develop "cognitive maps" of certain area that they designate as theirs. More often than not, a neighborhood is defined similar ethnic or religious groups and socioeconomic factors. Therefore, these similar groups all develop particular expectations about what the police should be doing in their areas. They also identify behaviors and actions that they see as acceptable or unacceptable (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003). Community policing takes these values into account in its mission of policing a certain area. Serious crimes and felonious behavior will always be punished, however more minuscule

infractions of the law that the neighborhood sees as acceptable may be looked over (Gaines and Kappeler, 2003). However one looks at the philosophy of community policing, it is far different than the traditional professional model of American policing.

Another emerging police philosophy is that of local commander