AHC: Police Reforms in the USA

Hyperion

Banned
I did not know that sherrifs are not elected in parts of the world. In the United States your lucky can get the different police organisations to work together without problems. An local example in the early-2000's the mayor of Schenectady asked the county sheriff department help the city police to cover parts of city. Some sheriff cars got there tires slash by a city police officer unhappy with the sheriff department coming into the city. But this year there talks about creating a county wide police department. http://blog.timesunion.com/schenectady/schenectady-county-police/1933/

Merging two or more different departments into one big department at the local level is not uncommon, and with the recession, some places seem to be considering the idea that ordinarily wouldn't have, or in some cases looking into the idea again after rejecting it in the past.

Personally, I wish Memphis, Tennessee would do that with the Shelby County Sheriff, and perhaps see if one or two of the smaller cities in Shelby County would be interested in a merger.

Both the Memphis Police and Shelby County Sheriff have over 2,000+ officers apiece already. If they where to merge, the end result would be one of the biggest departments in the country.
 
I find this tipical of foreigners.

Nothing personal, but do you actually know what US Law Enforcement is?

Sheriffs may have some control over minute local issues, but your basic crimes, murder, rape, speeding, drugs, robbery, etc, would be treated the same.

Sheriffs are local. State trumps local, and Federal trumps state.


The particular issue Im thinking of was the outlawing of visible undies by some wound-up shire councillor, who then gets the sherriff to go out and hassle teenagers. These morals types are the ones who get discovered down the track using the shire (or the county or whatever) credit card to pay for smack and underage hookers.
 

Moglwi

Monthly Donor
Perhaps a reorginsation of the 40+ fedral law enforcment aginces would be a better idea eg there is the FBI and the FBI police never mind the Dept of Education SWAT team:eek: The original model of town county state worked when comms was a man on a horse. But with improved comms and cost of eqiping a police having county forces and state force would probabvly make more sense with all police within a county reorginsed into 1 dept BTW
 
Perhaps a reorginsation of the 40+ fedral law enforcment aginces would be a better idea eg there is the FBI and the FBI police never mind the Dept of Education SWAT team:eek: The original model of town county state worked when comms was a man on a horse. But with improved comms and cost of eqiping a police having county forces and state force would probabvly make more sense with all police within a county reorginsed into 1 dept BTW

Uh..no. All you end up getting is less responsive and less professional departments. Have you ever had to deal with federal Law enforcement? It's not fun. They can act damn near anyway they want, because they fully know that there is no chance that the average citizen can effect their career or employment. Look at whats happening in the ATFE right now, they set up one of the dumbest undercover operation in years and it got people killed, and not a single one of the people responsible has been fired. They are just protecting their own. Even Congress members can't touch them. The larger or higher up the government level a department is the smaller the interest they have in meeting the needs of the public. Keeping law enforcement localized is in the best interest of the American public. Each level helps preform a different aspect of law enforcement and you get the each department policing the level under it so that no single group can abuse their power too much.
 
It is difficult to respond to this because of the large variety of local and state laws that establish and regulate police operations. However I think I can lay out some general concepts since our county is currently looking into this.

In Maryland (and I assume many other states) the Sherriff is a constitutionally mandated office. He is elected and considered 'The Chief law enforcement officer of the County'. In the constitution he is an Officer of the Court and has two mandated functions

1) The protection of the courthouse (and jail)
2) The serving of warrants

In some counties this is all he and his deputies do. The Police department is set up under seperate legislation under a Chief of Police to provide general law enforcement operations. In general larger more urban areas operate in this manner. In other counties there is a moderatly large Sherriffs department that provides general police protection

The State Police function in two modes. In some areas they prmarily enforce traffic and vehicle laws. In some (usually more rural) areas they provide general police protection. In Maryland they also operate a very effective Medivac operation

Local (municipal) police come in several forms. First of all Baltimore City is a somewhat unique entity. It is seperate from any county and can generally be treated the same as a county.

In the other 23 counties some (by law) do not have any seperate municipalities in them. In these the County Police are the local police. I believe all counties with this form of government have Police departments seperate from the Sherriff.

Other Counties have municipalities in them. Some of these counties have a seperate Police Department. In others the Sherriffs Department performs general police duties. The Municipalites have just as much variety. Some towns or cities have their own police departments ranging from a few to hundreds of officers. Others (usually small towns) use a contract system with either the County Sherriff or the State Police generally called Resident Deputies (or Troopers). In this arrangement the town pays a fee that subsidises the salary and equipment of the officer who then focuses his (or her) efforts on the town but is still a member of the larger department.

Our town has used this arrangement with the County Sherriff for years. We have three 'Town Deputies' When on duty they work in the town but can be called to respond outside town through the central dispatch. Also if they are not on duty we receive coverage through teh same central dispatch by regular county deputies (or the town deputy from a nearby town) Our town deputies are part of the larger department for promotion, special training, etc so they get the advantage of being in a larger department. Over the years we have had several town deputies get promoted out of the town into supervisory or special assignemnts (narcotics, detective, etc) We have seen some of these come back through town in these special roles or as fill ins for vacations, sick leave, etc of our regular deputies

To address the bigger question: Can I see all our police agencies being gathered under one roof and becoming one largecentralized department?

NO!!!!
First of all I don't see the many smaller towns and rural areas going for it. We see too many things that are controlled by the large Metro areas around Baltimore and Washington and can see rules and policies set up that would benefit them and cost us. Second I don't think the officers would go for it. There are too many issues of seniority, pay differences, etc that would have to be worked out. Then you have the snobbery that is sometimes seen between departments. then you have local knowledge and pride. Even some large departments are using something called Neighborhood policing where an officer or team of officers is assigned to a neighborhood or area so they can develop a rapport with the people. We already have that. Recently a Deputy who several years ago developed a reputation as being tough on teenage drivers recently rotated back as a Sergeant to cover when a town deputy was out on disability. Word spread quickly sometimes in a joking manner (and sometimes with a little fear) that Deputy Rogers was back.

So for various reasons - Some based in state law, some based on the desires or citizens, and some based simply on inertia I don't think there could be a 'one size fits all' solution in any single state let alone applying that solution to each or all of the 50 states
 
Last edited:
In New York State on the state level you have New York State Police, New York State Park Police, New York State Forest Rangers, and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Police. The New York State Park Police covers New York's 164 state parks and 35 state historic sites. Forest Rangers act as police officers, wildland firefighters and wilderness first responders in mostly the Adirondack and Catskill Parks. DEC Encon Officers are responsible for the enforcement of the state's environmental laws. The only change I would make is take the Park Police merge it with the State Police and have State Trooper assign to the Park.
 
Well, you have to realize that while the Sheriff is an elected official, most of the people who do the day-to-day work are civil servants. Also, in California, any peace officer is allowed to perform duties anywhere in the state.

It would also be unworkable, due to the fact that there are variations in ordinances at the local level, which requires a kind of local specialization.
 
Well, it works in Australia, in Germany (which BTW had communal police force until after WW2 and the allies introduced state police forces), in the Netherlands, in Austria, in Sweden etc.
 
I am surprised nobody has brought up the Gendarmerie Nationale or the RCMP yet!

Of course, while some law enforcement agencies could be joined together, some should be separate for jurisdictional reasons, or to cover specialized areas.
 
I am surprised nobody has brought up the Gendarmerie Nationale or the RCMP yet!
Because in France we have the civil Police nationale and Police municipale, Garde champêtre and the military Gendarmerie Nationale.
And it seems that the RCMP is not present in every canadian province, community and city.

Of course, while some law enforcement agencies could be joined together, some should be separate for jurisdictional reasons, or to cover specialized areas.
That's right, for somethings you do not need a state police.
 
I agree that one the benefits of having a localised police force is the ability to build rapport with the community they serve, etc.

However and I'm just interested to know if this occurs in the US, are more senior ranks and those in specialist units, etc, rotated to different location on a regular basis, the rationale being to reduce the potential for corruption?

Due to many of the reforms to policing that occured in Australia since the 1980's/1990's aimed at combatting corruption, it is required that senior ranking officers and those in specialist units (especially those in areas prone to corruption, such as vice squads, etc) be moved out of their positions after they have occupied them for a few years and that they be replaced by people from other areas. This is to reduce officers gaining personal 'fiefdoms' over the areas they control.

Also, it is common practice in Australia now, to consider applicants for the roles of Commissioner and Deputy Commisioner from interstate and even overseas police forces (the UK is a common one). This was based on the idea of having a more 'open' merit-based system of promotion with the police force, as compared to the old, more 'closed' system based on seniority and always appointed from within the state, that occured previously.
 
I agree that one the benefits of having a localised police force is the ability to build rapport with the community they serve, etc.

We caught the local cop shagging a friend of mine's mother in the Koroit cemetary, that's how you build rapport!
 
Top