Real Community Policing

Posted by – March 24, 2009

I was having a discussion the other day with Mostly Genius regarding the controversial statements made by Brian Stratton, the Mayor of Schenectady, New York, and that led to a more general discussion of how to fix a lot of the problems regarding law enforcement in the US today. The solutions proposed by the Mayor are misguided, but in any case, they are intended only as temporary measures until they can terminate the problem officers and hire new ones. They would not make any fundamental changes to how they operate.

Other options might include outsourcing policing to private companies. Private contractors could easily fill the gaps or even replace the entire department. Some gated communities already have what amounts to a private police force, but this only works because the community is actually private property and their “police” are technically security guards. There are numerous reasons why privatizing law enforcement duties would not be a wildly popular option, one of which, as MG pointed out, is that there would be problems with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

My proposal is hardly original or new but I think it could help address several problems simultaneously. I suggest rejuvenating the office of Sheriff and revive the idea of deputizing responsible, capable citizens under Posse Comitatus. This would be the ultimate form of “community policing”. It would encourage active participation in the community, not only for deterring regular street crime, but also in an emergency like an active shooter situation or in a civil defense (natural disaster, nuclear attack, etc.) context as well. The office of Sheriff is an ancient one that predates modern policing and has many advantages. In the United States, it is an elected office, which adds to its appeal as far as accountability to the community.

I envision it as something like a vetted, trained neighborhood watch program on steroids, supervised and trained by the local Sheriff’s Office. It could organized in a similar fashion to the military reserves:

  • an initial training program
  • a small number of full time cadre
  • a much larger number of part-time, on-call members
  • mandatory monthly duty and continuing education/refresher training
  • a comprehensive annual training seminar
  • the duty (and vested interest) to respond to emergencies

This program could work really well when you consider that in any given community, there are often retired or discharged people with law enforcement, firefighter/paramedic and/or military backgrounds that already have a lot of relevant training and experience. This could create a much larger pool of people to call on in the event that an officer is sick, injured, suspended, terminated, killed in the line of duty, etc. Some of the part timers may have relevant areas of expertise and could be a great help in training academies or seminars and so forth.

In the event of an unusual emergency that is beyond the capabilities of a small number of full time deputies (active shooter, escaped convict, search and rescue, AMBER Alert, etc) a large group of trained volunteers could be quickly mobilized to address the problem. When the problem is resolved, the volunteers go back to their normal lives. This is not only more economical and more responsive to specific problems, but it also builds a sense of camaraderie and reinforces bonds of community.

The overall goals of such a program would be to reduce the burden on law enforcement, make it more accountable and encourage the citizenry to take an active interest in the safety of their own communities instead of abrogating those responsibilities to some faceless agency.

Even Barack Obama recognizes the need for a different approach:

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

While I am not sure it would be a “… just as strong, just as well funded” as the military, it could be a significant improvement over the current situation in several ways. I don’t believe that merely throwing money at a problem leads to successful solutions. This idea would not require a lot of money to implement, to the contrary, I think it would make maximum use of already existing resources.

There are indications that Americans would embrace a program like this. People are already doing citizen patrols.

Against his wife’s loud protestations, the young steamfitter joined a dozen other neighborhood men and set up the Rosewood night patrol.

Armed with nothing but flashlights and cellphones, the group followed suspicious cars and even set up an impromptu sting when a neighbor left town and forgot to close his garage door. They called in police to arrest the suspects after a brief chase.

High foreclosure rates, a spike in brazen break-ins, and slashed police budgets are causing turmoil in America’s transitioning urban communities, auguring what Atlanta anticrime activist Larry Ely calls an “urban war.”

Why not organize, train and deputize them? No doubt many people, who are quite comfortable with the idea of an almighty state and a dependent, helpless citizenry squealing for the federal government to “do something!”, will decry this idea as promoting “vigilante” justice. I am sure they will invoke the images of Billy the Kid, the Lincoln County Wars and the Lattimer Massacre. I would counter by pointing out that significant numbers of innocent people are already being killed by allegedly professional SWAT teams. Many people made dire predictions of rampant duels and blood running in the streets if concealed weapons permits became commonplace and that has proven to be completely inaccurate.

Obviously, there could be nepotism, corruption and incompetence in a program like this, but I don’t think that those problems would be any worse than in any currently existing situations, and actually, they would probably be less frequent. Widespread, active citizen involvement in the program makes it more likely that a whistleblower could draw attention to problems within the office. Also, I think that active involvement by local citizens makes it less likely that deputies will kick down the wrong door when serving a warrant, unlike what we see today with SWAT teams frequently raiding the wrong home (and often killing innocent people in the process). After all, many of them could be your friends and neighbors.

(HT: Walls of the City )

  • Apologies for the delay in responding to this... right after you brought it to my attention, my computer decided to go nether regions up.

    Excuses aside, I would be all for the community policing its own, whether it is through increased awareness and activity within that community, or whether it is through this deputization concept. I would certainly worry about the exploitation and potential problems inherent in such a system, but so long as the training was explicit in their limits and capabilities, and liabilities were kept to a minimum (especially in our suit-happy legal system these days), I can definitely see such a concept bringing a lot of good to otherwise troubled communities.

    Hell, people like Pro-Gun Progressive are doing this on a daily basis as we speak now, but without the benefit of approval or support from his police department. In Pigtown, Baltimore, no less.

    Simply getting people more active in their communities would be a great first step... showing them that they live there, they already have a vested interested, and they can actually do something about the crime they see... Too long we have heard "It is not my problem," or "Let the police handle it," or "Try not to bother X family,"... Vigilantism is a threat if carried too far, but by the same token, I have a responsibility for the safety of my society, as a law-abiding, capable, adult citizen.

    Unfortunately, for the reasons you list, neither yours nor my ideas would ever fly in "modern" society... and yet they are willing to throw trained war-fighters into street-side policing situations. I mean no disrespect to any NG member, but policing is not in their training handbook, and that will only lead to problems in such a situation as the one in Schenectady.

  • Modeled on the National Guard, I think we could probably draw similar conclusions as to how effective it would be. Just ask a vet of Iraq or Afghanistan how well disciplined and well behaved the National Guard boys were/are over there.

    I don't need to ask anyone, because I am a military veteran and I have been over there. I had no problems with the Guardsmen I encountered in Iraq. In fact, they performed quite well.

    If you want an only slightly exaggerated picture, rent Generation Kill.

    I have the book, and those were active duty Marines, not Army National Guard. Maybe you could draw conclusions from sources other than apocryphal rumors and TV programs. In any case, this is irrelevant. America is not Iraq or Afghanistan, police are not military forces and we shouldn't be using them to wage war on our own populace. If the program I am suggesting is loosely based on a Reserve/Guard model, that is because it is similar to (but better than) the traditional, common law Posse Comitatus, which allowed a sheriff to conscript men above a certain age for law enforcement duties. It ensures a certain amount of uniformity of training, makes everyone aware of their what is expected of them and generally gets everyone on the same page. A Police Explorer program could even be incorporated into this concept. There are many possibilities.

    The model such as the one I outlined has historical precedent, and some communities actually already have similar programs, so it's not like this is unheard of. Maricopa County, Arizona has been doing something very similar to what I was thinking of for many years, although I propose a somewhat more ambitious program. I don't know how well disciplined they are, but given Sheriff Joe Arpaio's well known reputation, I am going to guess that they are pretty well behaved.

    I believe a Sheriff's Posse is more accountable, not less, because instead of a large “standing army” of indifferent or even hostile police, you have a large group of concerned volunteers made up of regular citizens, your relatives, neighbors and friends, not random strangers who may or may not have any roots in your community. Most people don't know the names of their police officers or their police chiefs and have never talked to them unless they were in trouble. This should change, and I think this is a good way to do it. I want to reduce or eliminate the “us versus them” mentality in law enforcement as well as revive a spirit of self-reliance, community involvement and voluntary cooperation in America.

    But then again, I truly do believe that this would be a non issue if all states were mandatory Shall Issue states for Concealed carry permits. Remember, there is a real and definite reason that 95% of all criminals are pro gun Control.

    I am all for CCW, in fact, if I had it my way, every state would be like Vermont but I don't think “shall issue” by itself is the magic solution to crime that some people, such as yourself, seem to think it is. After all, Alabama is a CCW (“may issue” rather than “shall issue”, but I think it makes little difference in this case) state, and that had no effect on their recent active shooter fiasco. Another example is the mall shooting in Tacoma, where two permit holders had an opportunity, but failed to save the day. Merely being armed is not a complete solution. Training is essential, but that is not the whole answer, either. You need a PLAN. Presumably, you think that a group of unaffiliated, pistol packing citizens will spontaneously organize to stop a rampaging criminal or criminals (think Mumbai) armed with rifles. At best, they can defend themselves (maybe), which is fine and good, but that doesn't solve the problem of a maniac (or multiple maniacs) on the loose in your community, since a permit holder has no mandatory duty to engage the criminal(s) instead of fleeing, nor should they.

    What I propose would be a way to organize permit holders into a cohesive group of well trained volunteers with a well rehearsed contingency plan, instead of a disorganized mob of confused people with guns, which is what exists now in many places. Returning to my Alabama example; the Sheriff is already the one who makes the decision to grant a concealed weapons permit, so a deputized posse program could flow naturally from that.

    Rule #1 of gunfighting: Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns.

  • I have real problems with believing that something like this would work out well. Modeled on the National Guard, I think we could probably draw similar conclusions as to how effective it would be.

    Just ask a vet of Iraq or Afghanistan how well disciplined and well behaved the National Guard boys were/are over there. If you want an only slightly exaggerated picture, rent Generation Kill.

    I want to believe that it would be an effective way to address what is obviously a growing issue in this country, but logic tells me otherwise.

    But then again, I truly do believe that this would be a non issue if all states were mandatory Shall Issue states for Concealed carry permits. Remember, there is a real and definite reason that 95% of all criminals are pro gun Control.

blog comments powered by Disqus