American policing has borrowed heavily from the English system of law enforcement. During colonial times citizens were responsible for maintaining law and order in their communities. This method was largely ineffective as it was premised on a volunteer system and was characterized by disorganization. With time, there was a shift in policing responsibility from individual citizens to groups of men led by sheriffs. In 18th century the policing system was overwhelmed by increased social disorders and unrests. Thus, publicly financed police departments were introduced which later on paved way for formalized policing.
It was until 19th century that these police departments were unified within states. New York City Police Department was for instance unified in 1845. Inspired by the need for protection of individual liberties and partly influenced by English policing system, it adopted attributes such as limited policing authority by law, fragmentation of policing and that local authorities bore the responsibility of providing policing services. Towards the end of 19th century, they were mandated to be uniformed and allowed to be armed.
The evolution of law enforcement in the United States since then can be categorized into phases. The “political era” ran from 1800 through to the 1900s. This phase was characterized by intricate nexus between policing and politics. It is in this period that call boxes with direct lines to police headquarters were established to aid communication among patrol officers. This phase was then succeeded by the policing “reform era’ which lasted from 1900 through to 1970s.
The policing “reform era” was characterized by separation of policing from politics and introductions of hiring standards. There was also professionalization and centralization of law enforcement agencies. Since then, the law enforcement has retained certain attributes that sets it apart from those of other countries. For instance, they are multi-tiered, highly decentralized and fragmented.
In intelligence field for instance, the law enforcement has gradually evolved since early 1920s when the use of “dossier system” was predominant. Under the system, assorted compilation comprising raw information on people suspected of being involved in criminal activities or associated with criminals was kept in dossier-files. Through the 1930s, there was not notable advancement of intelligence mechanism. The country was addressing more pressing concerns such as the economic depression as opposed to criminality. This explains why the law enforcement agencies resorted to dossier system all through the phase of World War II. During this period, “red files” were kept for people suspected of advancing communist ideologies and their sympathizers. Communism was considered a threat to the US national security.
Past World War II moving into the 1960s law enforcement efforts in the US were brought under scrutiny. This development was motivated by liberal interpretations accorded to constitutional rights during the judicial activism era spearheaded by Chief Justice Earl Warren. Landmark Supreme Court decisions that were seen as keeping the law enforcement agencies in check paved way for numerous law suits against the police and correctional institutions. The law suits revolved around police misconduct and violation of due process. It then came to light that various law enforcement agencies were keeping intelligence records on people for whom there was no proof of criminal suspicions. In such cases, the courts ordered expunction of dossier files and more often the responsible agencies had to pay damages. Citizens were also allowed access to their files some of which were published by activists with the intention of embarrassing the police. The embarrassment coupled with prohibitory costs in damages resulted in drastic cut back of law enforcement operations.
The evolution of law enforcement in the US since the 1970s to date can be properly described as “community era” since it has seen the emergence of community policing tailored to improve the relations between the police and community following the police-citizen conflicts of 1960s. Community policing was inspired by Wilson and Kelling’s “broken windows” theory. They basically argued that minor crimes ought to be tamed in order to curb serious ones and that the essence of policing it to make the community feel safe. Community policing has taken root although some departments still practice zero-tolerance approach.
The present day law enforcement is predominantly technology-aided. Utilization of GPS applications, facial recognition, CCTVs, social media among others have proven to be useful in maintaining public safety and security.
The future of law enforcement appears to be intelligence driven or data oriented policing. There will be fewer men and women in uniform doing general and regular patrols like they did in the past. This trend is due to the fact that the law enforcement agencies are no longer allocated as much the resources they were in the recent past. Besides, technological progress associated with the information age promises to play a major role in shifting the policing strategy from patrol oriented to intelligence centered.
The Police Executive research Forum (PERF) in conjunction with Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) and Target Corporation carried out a “Future Policing” survey in 2012. It involved more than 500 law enforcement agencies. According to the findings, 38 percent of responding police departments had already adopted predictive policing while 70 percent were planning to implement it within the next five years. Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) was found to be leading the states in predictive policing.
There is also the Nation-wide Public Safety Broadband Network which promises great transformation of policing in the near future. The establishment of network was recommended by the 9/11 Commission Report having identified impairment of communication among multi-jurisdictional responders during the 9/11 terror attack as one of the discrepancies. In 2012 President Obama signed into law a Bill establishing the Nation-wide Public Safety Broadband Network (NPSBN). The legislation set aside the “D-block” section of the radio spectrum from for exclusive public safety use. Once the network becomes operational, it will transform the way law enforcement agencies respond to crimes and other emergencies.
In August 2011, the Congress enacted the Budget Control Act (BCA) which sought to establish either a deficit reduction plan or sequestration for the Financial Years 2012 and 2013. Accordingly, the Congress adopted the deficit reduction plan which saw the reduction of federal funding of domestic discretionary programs by 8.2 percent. By the year 2014, federal funding for the criminal justice assistance grant programs had fallen by a staggering 43 percent. Such budgetary trends characterized by budget cuts will have significant impacts on law enforcement. It will affect the operational strategies of the police, courts and correctional institutions.
The budget cuts will cripple the courts’ ability to expeditiously resolve cases and disputes. As a result, they will not be able to discharge their duties of keeping societal order and upholding public safety. It is reported that judicial underfunding has already resulted in inordinate delays in resolving criminal cases. Accordingly, there have been instances where untried defendants are “warehoused in local jails” and potentially violent offenders prematurely released. A case in point is in the state of Washington where a suspect in a violent case was released due to expeditious trial concerns. He then raped a woman and killed a pedestrian in a subsequent high speed chase. This is a clear illustration of existence of a causal correlation between judicial underfunding and jeopardy in public safety and security.
The budget undercuts is not without impacts on correctional institutions as well. It has greatly jeopardized the operational efficiencies of various correctional facilities across the country. There are reports of states having to reduce the inmate healthcare services. Additionally, some have retrenched their staff and introduced hiring freezes. Worse enough, some states have resorted to reduction of salaries and benefits of their corrections staff.
However, the aforementioned austerity measures adopted by various states in respect to cost reduction in their respective correctional institutions will not hold for long. As long as the prison population continues to increase, the costs will follow course. It is anticipated that most states will resort to addressing prison population itself. This will involve adoption of early prison release policy. To this end, inmates who can be safely released back to the community before clearing their prison terms will have to be identified and released. Additionally, the states will have to grapple with the question as to what kind criminals must be imprisoned in order to keep the population of inmates within manageable levels. If not properly considered, such measures potentially pose adverse impacts on public safety and security. More so, it might results I increased recidivism rates.
` Furthermore, budgetary trends will impede maintenance of law and order by the law enforcement agencies. However, it will force police departments either to adopt police foundations projects or enter into partnerships with other organizations. A case in question is the formation of the National Police Foundation Project in 2010. According to the Police Executive Research Forum 2014 report, there were 180 police foundations across the country in 2012. It is argued that such foundations help in bridging financial gaps by raising funds and mobilizing resources to meet the police equipment and operational needs that cannot be catered for by public sector mechanisms. Additionally, police foundations create avenues for involvement of private sector in crime prevention.
With regard to partnerships with other organizations, cooperation with universities and other research institutions offer a window of opportunity for future development in law enforcement. Law enforcement agencies are likened to “living libraries” endowed with massive data. However, the law enforcement agencies lack adequate human and technical capacity to exploit the data in optimally productive ways. Universities and research institutions have the capacity and technical knowhow which can help the law enforcement agencies in bridging the capacity gap in question.
In conclusion, this paper recommends reevaluation of budgetary and managerial mechanisms of law enforcement agencies, judiciary and correctional institutions.
References
Carter, D. L. (2005). Brief History of Law Enforcement Intelligence: Past Practice and Recommendations for Change. Trends in Organized Crime , 8 (3), 51-62.
Congressional Research Sevice. (2013). Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program. Washington, D.C.: Congress of United States.
Grossi, P. T., Mills, J. L., & Vagenas, K. (2012). Crisis in the Courts: Reconnaissance and Recommendations. Washington, D.C.: National Center for State Courts.
Kelling, G. L., & Moore, M. H. (1988). The History of Police: The Evolving Strategy of Policing. Retrieved March 2, 2016, from Sage Publications Inc: <http://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/50819_ch_1.pdf>.
Office of the Inspector General: US department of Justice. (2013). Top Management and Performance Challenges. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice.
Pearsall, B. (2010, June 23). Predictive Policing: The Future of Law Enforcement? Retrieved March 2, 2016, from <National Institute of Justice: http://www.nij.gov/journals/266/pages/predictive.aspx>.
Police Executive Research Forum. (2014). Future Trends in Policing. Washigton, D.C.: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Scott, C. H. (2009). The Fiscal Crisis in Corrections: Rethinking Policies and Practices. New York: VERA Institute of Justice.
Shepard, E. R. (2002). POLICE: HISTORY. Retrieved March 2, 2016, from Encyclopedia.com: <http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3403000181.html>.
