1. Define the ways in which each component (police, courts, and corrections) of the criminal justice system administers justice. Which component is most effective at meeting their goals?
Police play the role of working with the public in order to enforce legal requirements and protect the privacy and liberty of individuals. In order to do this, however, police rely on the underlying cultural values and norms of the communities in which they function. Police interact with the public in order to ascertain those that are committing offenses and present these individuals to the criminal justice system for sentencing of those offenses. Police are therefore the component that has the most influential effect on the everyday lives of people. They serve as a visible enforcement of the laws that have been established by society. By enforcing laws and investigating those that have been broken police serve as the basis for the criminal justice system and its ability to function. By coordinating their efforts with the other components, the police are able to designate offenders and place them in the position for punitive retaliation for those that they have committed (Peak, 2016). They are able to respond to dangerous situations and effectively manage solutions to resolve them. By utilizing tools to address recurrent problems within communities, police are able to apply their resources towards the implementation of social efforts at enforcing the public good.
Courts were historically established in order to consider controversies that arose between citizens or other parties that could not be domestically resolved. The primary function of courts is the enforcement of law. Those that the police designate as having broken specific laws are then scrutinized by the courts in order to ascertain whether their crimes, if committed, should be punished and to what extent. The courts contribute to justice by attempting to get at the truth. By assessing the underlying elements involved in criminal cases and determining the most important factors courts are able to critically resolve disputes and present judgment in order to contribute to the effective promotion of justice. Through deliberation the courts evaluate the circumstances of the cases that they preside over and assess the conditions on which the crimes were committed (Peak, 2016). By doing so, they are able to provide a level playing field that is conditioned to establish a basis for decisions to be made. Fairness is an essential element of courts, which strive to achieve the least bias when deciding on cases. By taking into account the presented evidence and considering the various factors involved, courts are able to come to the most likely truth that can be objectively determined. This allows them to enforce justice by adhering to the principles of fairness and equality.
Corrections organizations, such as prisons, jails, and probation, are essential to the criminal justice system and its ability to administer justice. Providing citizens with safety, security, and protection while simultaneously working to help the offender population reintegrate into society or to overcome their criminal tendencies are the primary goals of the corrections component. Working with civil and criminal elements, the corrections organizations function in establishing a framework for promoting the progressive mitigation of the potential for future criminal behavior. While jails and prisons work to provide a place that those that are deemed to be a danger to the social good are kept while they are processed and reconditioned for public life probationary services work to ensure that these individuals adhere to the principles of justice when released back into the public sphere. Corrections services therefore work to enhance the goal of public safety while simultaneously ensuring that those who are committed into the justice system are given the opportunity to receive help. This component is responsible for “reduced incarceration and an increase in noninstitutional time” (Lofstrom & Raphael, 2016, p. 5). Furthermore, corrections help to ensure that the basic rights of inmates and those on probation or parole have their rights ensured. Community corrections are generally regarded as a humane and logical way of helping criminal offenders adapt to life once they have gone through their sentencing. By providing resources and activities and effecting specific outcomes, corrections serve administers justice by ensuring the general well-being of both criminals and society.
The component most effective at reaching their goals are the courts. While all three components work to establish the administration of justice, it is the courts that are able to most effectively achieve the goals of impartiality when doing so. While the police are susceptible to the personal considerations of the officers themselves, the corrections community are often driven by either biases, such as privately owned prisons, or the need for funding, which prevents them from successfully administering justice in a complete way. The courts, on the other hand, are generally expected to follow precedent when making decisions and, due to the general transparency of the decisions that they make, will often do so in a level and just manner. Furthermore, courts are able to contribute to justice by maintaining fair and balanced conditions on which decisions are made. The impartiality of juries, for example, makes corruption more difficult in relation to eliminating doubt. The most difficult circumstances that can be considered on this account is the relationship between courts and public opinion. In any case, it seems that the “three other major components of the correctional system have also been growing at a rapid pace” (Austin, 2010, p. 12). The biggest problem with the court system is its adversarial nature, which pits people against one another in a competitive trial. This limits the accountability of decisions and contributes to a lack of justice on the part of the general values of the court. In assessing the values of society, the court system can be viewed as one of the most effective in relation to the three main components of the criminal justice system.
2. Thoroughly define the purposes of policies, procedures, rules, and regulations in police organizations. For each, explain why they exist, their importance, and provide examples that will further your discussion. Then describe what would possibly occur if each did not exist (i.e., adding to the discussion of their importance).
Policies exist because police organizations need a basis by which to judge the strategies that they use in order to promote justice. By critically examining the level of service that their organization is able to provide to society police can effectively manage the conditions by which they can contribute to a growing need for the just enforcement of law. The policies that police use contribute to the norms by which police are able to act when doing their jobs. Policies are important because they provide a basic framework by which the conditions that police work under can be more adequately assessed. In relating the various conditions under which police are able to act policies can be used in order to examine the decisions that they make and the actions that they take. “American policy makers in the 1980s and early 1990s stopped thinking much about the criminal law as an institution primarily aimed at reinforcing fundamental social norms and responding responsibly, proportionately, and parsimoniously to their breach (Tonry, 2014, p. 504). Some examples of policies include uniforms, distribution and use of equipment, and management of personal time. These are important points that have a profound impact on how police are received by the public as well as their ability to effectively function in the way that they are supposed to. If policies such as these did not exist then it would be difficult for the public to recognize or be protected by the people that are supposed to protect them. Policies act as the underlying orientation that the organization is attempting to adhere to in its day-to-day operations.
Procedures exist because there is a need to ensure that when a person is arrested there are specific guidelines that must be followed. In doing so, it is believed that the personal rights of the individual will be better protected. In developing specific procedures for dealing with various circumstances, police can be better trained to deal with the challenges that they face while still adhering to their legal obligations. Procedures are important because they provide a basis for ensuring that the personal rights of the individual are not susceptible to the personal discretion of the officers themselves. Instead, there are strict guidelines by which they must act in accordance with certain legal requirements. These guidelines are designed to protect not only the personal rights and safety of the individuals, but the officers as well. Some examples of procedures that are used by police include the need for probable cause or arrest warrants before acting or using their authority (Peak, 2016). If procedures did not exist then police would be more susceptible to breaking the law or crossing socially unacceptable boundaries. By clearly delineating the specific actions that police can and cannot take they are able to better deal with both the public good and the good of the organization as a whole.
Rules exist because of the need for a hierarchy of authority in relation to the values that are in place. The conditions on which police can act within their organizations are dependent upon the requirements that are placed on their roles within society. The establishment of rules helps to clearly define boundaries that could be potentially crossed in regards to both interdepartmental interactions and those with the general public. The various rules and commitments that a police organization adopts can be dependent on a variety of factors including the direction of authority and the relationships that exist among the police themselves. Rules are important because they provide a source of authority by which police are objectively required to act (Peak, 2016). They contribute to a higher expectation that has been levied at the officers themselves in relation to their attitudes and their performance. Some examples include the expectations for the use of their firearms, use of handcuffs and other safety measures, and specific procedures that are related to the investigation of different types of cases. If rules did not exist there would be no way for officers to know whether they are acting in line with the overall goals of the organizations that they are a part of. The boundaries that police are expected to act within are primarily determined by the rules that have been lain out.
Regulations exist because of the need for a legal adoption of the conditions of police action and the implementation of their authority. Regulations are the requirements that have been placed on police organizations by those institutions that have authority over them. Regulations act as a check on the power of police agencies, ensuring that they act within the bounds of the law. In relation to law, regulations are primarily determined by the legislation that is in place concerning the actions and authority of police organizations. Regulations are important because they provide a way to assess the general activity of police organizations. This is important because “laws and cultural norms protect liberty and privacy, legal authorities rely on the public’s cooperation and acquiescence” (Kochel, 2013, p. 896). They present an authority to which these organizations are responsible in answering to and communicate the expectations that society has in relation to their conduct. Some examples of regulations include requirements in relation to the use of force, ensuring that the rights of citizens are not suspended when arrests are made, and ensuring that organizational equipment and structures are up to code. If regulations did not exist then there would be no oversight to ensure that the expectations that society has in relation to the activities of police organizations are being met. Regulations provide an effective way to mitigate the potential for injustice being carried out on the part of the police.
5. Discuss the effects of budget on either the police, courts, or corrections. With the reduction in our budget, where do you see this component of our criminal justice system heading?
The effect that budgets can have on police organizations is profound. The need for resources, staff, and the delivery of law enforcement services to the public presents the importance of budgeting for this particular component of the criminal justice system. The ability for these organizations to respond to a variety of circumstances is directly tied into the level of budget that they have to work with. In response to this need, organizations will likely be structured in ways that allows for them to flexibly manage their budgets in order to ensure that the expectations of monetary constraints are met. However, their capacity to produce results can be potentially limited when these structures are threatened. The budget that is given to these organization allows them maintain staff and train them in order to effectively manage their circumstances (Peak, 2016). The general structure of the organization and the roles that each of those within are assigned are profoundly effected by budget. This can, in turn, have an impact on the extent to which they are able to protect local communities from crime.
With reductions in budget for police organizations, the component will likely head towards an ineffective role. Without the necessary resources, police organizations can be stretched to the point where they no longer have the necessary resources to manage any of the challenges that they face within their community activities. Budget profoundly effects the capacity of these organizations to produce results and to strategically enhance the level of safety that is expected from the public. Police face danger when on the job and the nature of risk associated with their position demonstrates the need for higher pay that can incentivize people to take the positions. In filling these positions, police organizations are able to better adapt to changing circumstances without having to sacrifice the integrity other engagements that might otherwise be susceptible to budget cuts. In assessing the criteria, it is evident that there is a fundamental need for the consideration of the challenges that police organizations could potentially face in the future.
Potential cuts to the budget of the organization can therefore pose a significant risk to public safety. These risks are associated with the overall value that is given to the problems that communities face. Responding to issues such as theft and burglary, motor vehicle accidents, and threats of violence or domestic abuse is an important function of police and cuts to budget limits the ability that these agencies have to put their resources towards helping citizens. This is due to the reduced ability of police organizations to not only employ those that are able to fill the necessary positions but also to train them so that they can effectively respond to the given circumstances. With reductions in police and resources, these organizations are unable to provide the necessary services to the public, which can profoundly effect the level of public safety that exists in society. Budget cuts can therefore be seen to relate to the requirements of police organizations in obtaining the results that are required by the demands of public safety and order.
Training of police can also effect the service that they are able to provide. Knowing and understanding the values of a local community is necessary for effective policing. When police are given the responsibility of patrolling larger areas then the interpersonal relationship between police and their communities can be lost. This can reduce the level of trust that exists between the public and police organizations. Reductions in budget can also lead to police organizations having less access to technology. This limits the edge that police have on potential criminals and reduces their ability to respond to threats accordingly. This is a risk to the general good of the public and results in an ineffective ability to respond to various emergencies. Budgetary constraints also challenge police organizations in their focus.
This can lead to difficulty in structuring police organizations, which relies heavily on adequate funding in order to achieve results. These results are related to the capacity that police have to train professionals (Peak, 2016). A lack of adequately trained forces can significantly reduce the ability of police organizations to effectively reduce criminal behaviors. When organizations such as the police become stressed due to budget constraints it results in severe limitations to the ability that these organizations have to make decisions that are based on public need rather than on monetary realities. When these organizations are forced to stretch their budgets to match fiscal needs essential services can be at risk of being cut entirely. When subject to the demands of economic realities, police organizations can be challenged to produce the necessary results. The potential for a rise of criminal behavior is increased in such situations. This demonstrates the risks of budget cuts to police organizations.
References
Austin, J. (2010). Reducing America’s Correctional Populations: A Strategic Plan. Justice Research And Policy, Vol. 12, No. 1. 9-40.
Kochel, T.R., Parks, R., & Mastrofski, S.D. (2013). Examining Police Effectiveness as a Precursor to Legitimacy and Cooperation with Police. Justice Quarterly, 2013 Vol. 30, No. 5, 895-925.
Lofstrom, M. & Raphael, S. (2016). Prison Downsizing and Public Safety Evidence From California. Criminology & Public Policy. Vol. 15, Issue 2. 17.
Peak. (2016). The Study and Scope of Justice Administration. Justice Administration: An Introduction.
Peak. (2016). Police Organization and Operation. Justice Administration: An Introduction.
Peak. (2016). The Courts. Justice Administration: An Introduction.
Peak. (2016). Corrections Organization and Operation. Justice Administration: An Introduction.
Peak. (2016). Financial Administration. Justice Administration: An Introduction.
Tonry, M. (2014). Remodeling American Sentencing A Ten-Step Blueprint for Moving Past Mass Incarceration. Criminology & Public Policy Vol. 13, Issue 4. 503-533.
