Police Discretion

Police Discretion

Police discretion refers law enforcer’s opportunity to exercise choice on their line of duty. While the police officers when executing their duties should consider discretion, it must not be used in the enforcement of law. In essence, police discretion is a critical law enforcement trait because it allows a law enforcement agent to apply different course of actions to different scenarios. Lack of police discretion implies that all situations must be handled with the same force, which could earn a bad reputation to the police department (Walker & Katz, 2012). In addition to innocent citizens getting injured, people will file lawsuits against the police service. Police discretion can be implemented to handle particular situations, especially if control mechanisms are applied.

Realistically, police discretion cannot be eliminated. Nonetheless, numerous issues associated with discretion prompt the use of control mechanisms. Internally, departmental procedures and policies should be implemented on the use of laws that limits the law enforcer’s use of discretion (Kadish & Kadish, 2013). Externally, the law enforcement agencies should establish better supervision of patrol officers to observe their activities and to address issues as they arise. For instance in the New York City, the development of procedures and policies on the use of deadly force had a positive impact.

Furthermore, legislatures reduce police discretion if introduced. Zero-tolerance laws, for example, demands the use of police sanctions such as arrests for specific crimes. Other crimes that fit into the category include firearm crimes, drug crimes, and domestic violence. Citizens (through communities) can introduce zero-tolerance environment where polluters are prosecuted, thus requiring the intervention of law enforcers. Communities have an ability to come to a consensus to work hand-in-hand with the police in upholding societal law and order.

Question 2: Utilitarianism and Deontological Ethics

Utilitarian ethics refers to a normative ethical system concerned with the outcomes of ethical decision (Sellers, 2016). Similar to teleological theory, utilitarianism has a notion that the act’s consequence determines its morality or immorality. On the other hand, deontological ethics considers the morality of law enforcer’s act based on adherence to a set of rules.

Police officers have a discretion that ought to be exercised at all ranks regardless of the experience or seniority. During the exercise, complex issues confront the law enforcement officers. In most cases, such issues are not included in the agency’s policy but were possibly covered during police training or formal education (Pollock, 2014). The society and the government expect police officers to make delicate decisions. Thus, they should rely on utilitarianism for ethical decision making that is defensible in case of  future scrutiny. For instance, a police officer tasked with policing a pro-smoking protest may spot a protester within the group selling marijuana. Essentially, the law enforcement officer has a legal mandate to charge the individual under Controlled Drug and Substance Abuse Act. Interestingly, this will be a serious indictable violation.

From a utilitarian standpoint, the officer has an option not to arrest and charge the offender because the pro-marijuana protesters will be happier in comparison with a few individuals that will not be pleased by the officer’s decision. Secondly, if the officer makes a trafficking arrest, the pro-marijuana protesters will likely confront the officer violently. The officer, therefore, should consider the potential consequences if people were allowed to sell or smoke marijuana as a recreational drug. If the law enforcer is convinced that the society is comfortable with the rule, he should allow the sale of the drug to continue.  

Question 3: Police Officer Federal Liability

            Most police officers fear exposure to liability for their actions, both improper and proper. However, courts in the United States only sanction extreme egregious police conduct to avoid second-guessing. Under 42 USC sec. 1983, the citizens have a remedy for redressing officer’s violations of civil rights. While this section falls short of creating substantive rights, it is an important mechanism to enforce rights granted by the US constitution. The plaintiff must show clear evidence of constitutional violation under state law (Dempsey, 2013). There are three elements of 42 USC sec. 1983. First, the officers must have violated a federally protected right or the constitution. Second, the violation must occur due to a police action that is taken under the cover of law. It implies that the officer misused his power accorded by federal law. Lastly, the plaintiff must suffer damages, though courts at times grant nominal damages to vindicate the plaintiff. Some of the most common police liabilities under this section include false imprisonment, use of unreasonable or excessive force, and, and malicious prosecution.

            People that forward claims of false arrest cite a violation of Fourth Amendment that protects the citizens against unreasonable seizure (Hess et al., 2015). Notably, the arrest is reasonable if the plaintiff committed a crime. In the case of malicious prosecution, claims regrinding the infringement of Fourteenth Amendment on the right to liberty. The plaintiff cannot win this claim unless there is no probable cause and the police triggered the proceeding. A case on the use of excessive force often ends in plaintiffs favor especially if the police officer had ill intentions. Ideally, the outcome holds irrespective of reasonability of excessive force.

Question 4: Community Policing

            Community policing focuses on police working closely and building ties with the members of a given community. The program requires police to adopt a proactive approach in addressing public safety concerns (Cordner, 2014). Additionally, community policing creates partnerships between community members and the law enforcement agency. The program recognizes that the police cannot successfully solve public safety issues alone without the creation of interactive partnerships. In this sense, the policing involves the in developing permanent solutions that eliminate crime in the society. Besides helping to curb disorder, law enforcement officers are helpful in times of emergency. The community is an important source of information for solving the crime and addressing the societal concerns.  Over time, strong bond between the police and community members develops for better service provision.

Challenges

In other communities, the program has received strong resistance from the residents, thus diminishing its effectiveness. In addition, it is hard to assess the impact because of little research and data available to prove the success of community policy. As a result, police are wary of introducing it in densely populated areas. Moreover, the implementation process is tedious and costly. It takes a significant amount of time to educate the public and to integrate community policing as a system of law enforcement. Citizens wrongly interpret police history in the United States, making it harder to conceive a new form of policing because none existed in the past (Gill et al., 2014). Police are also viewed as crime fighters. Therefore, it is hard to justify other programs other than the activities of law enforcement agents.

References

Cordner, G. (2014). Community Policing. The Oxford Handbook of Police and Policing, 148-171.

Dempsey, J. S., & Forst, L. S. (2013). An Introduction to Policing. New York: Cengage Learning.

Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vitter, Z., & Bennett, T. (2014). Community-Oriented Policing To Reduce Crime, Disorder and Fear and Increase Satisfaction and Legitimacy among Citizens: A Systematic Review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(4), 399-428.

Hess, K. M., Orthmann, C. H., & Cho, H. L. (2015). Police Operations: Theory and Practice. New York: Cengage Learning.

Kadish, M. R., & Kadish, S. H. (2013). Discretion to Disobey: A Study of Lawful Departures From Legal Rules. Chicago: Quid Pro Books.

Pollock, J. M. (2014). Ethical Issues in Policing. Controversies in Policing, 119.

Sellers, B. G. (2016). Ethics in Policing. The Encyclopaedia of Crime & Punishment.

Walker, S., & Katz, C. M. (2012). Police in America. London: McGraw-Hill.