Crime Control and Policy Creation

Crime Control and Policy Creation

Lady Justice is NOT Blind

Crime Control and Policy Creation by Chris Grollnek

Crime Control vs Due Process and addressing what these ideologies “stand for or represent.” Crime control and policy creation demonstrates how simple good ideas are not enough to replace a solid policy.  Recently these concepts have created some acute tensions with civil libertarian concerns. What better time to roll out a series on policy and the minutia behind its creation and implementation. Few understand what goes into policy decisions or even how to create policy. This is synergistic between governmental and business policies although the models may differ the need remains the same. It is my hope that after reading the whole series, you will find that discovering the need for a policy takes far more than deciding you want a policy.

Institutions begin the process by the discovery of the need method. This is the crucial part prior to the conceptual stage, creation and implementation or roll out. Here is an example I’ll start with from recent headlines and explain how to address each topic and a policy strategy for each by a follow up piece next week.

Crime Control vs. Due Process and the representation from the start:

The theory on crime control is one that was set forth on basic principles. Protecting society in a manner conducive to enforcing laws and curbing criminal behavior. These theories can be linked to criminological behavior and analysis, policing models, specialized units for enforcement, and several more similar in scope.

To effectively believe that officers, both public and private would be able to “control” the behaviors of another is near impossible. We watch this on the news when the public demands action and police are uncertain how to respond. When a person or group sets their mind(s) to do something, no matter the preventative measures in place, a person can succeed under the motivational statement; “the most committed wins!” The opening statement simply puts some facts and behavioral analysis into perspective. The true facts however are police prevent crime through crime control techniques all day every day. Police officers achieve this through presence, response, force; both minimum and deadly, and the application of a core set of policies and procedures effected by community values.

Many departments run into issues with Justice Department oversight when reaching too far into the control portion and find themselves with rouge divisions or actors. The Los Angeles Police Department is an example of a rouge unit in the extreme sense of the example.   Rampart started a specialized unit as a criminal apprehension and “deployment” squad analyzing behaviors and patterns of criminal activity. The goal under the Chief’s new policy at the time was to suppress it where possible if probable.

The end result was a far departure from what the vision of the policy was, the intention of the unit’s commanders, and was separated by the community values. The most unfortunate part was the least considered portion was their needs. The police actions stepped out of bounds and due process in the officer’s minds became criminal intent (Reese, 2003).

Crime control works well when adopted under the appropriate guidelines and Due Process in the standard in which laws are enforced via appropriate policy through representation. The Broken Windows model of policing sets boundaries, goals, and achievable standards to achieve the suppression of crime and criminal behavior (Wilson & Kelling, March 1982). Not every model of policing is effective for numerous reasons, but many work well when managed through partnerships as long as there is community “buy in” for the systematic policies implemented.

Due Process of law ensures the entire system is operating as the cog it was designed to effectively providing the police to combat criminal behavior through legal statutes. Conversely, this same authority could keep police in line and provide motivation to detract them from crossing the line of right and wrong. Due process is a series of steps through the criminal justice system from start to finish and not all agree that crime control is effective when due process is involved.

This is merely a starting point for my series on policy and how deep thinkers that create it find the intersections where most needed. Recent news events demonstrate where policies were not considered where most likely needed. There is much more to write on regarding this subject so I will be rolling it out over the next several weeks in approximately 10 parts. This is a good starting point that will lead into policies for work place violence and active shooter prevention and how to begin the creation by discovering the needs.

Chris Grollnek M.S.

Nationally Recognized Active Shooter Prevention Expert

Reference

Reese, R. (2003). The Multiple Causes of the LAPD Rampart Scandal.
California State Polytechnic University. Retrieved from http://www.csupomona.edu/~jis/2003/Reese.pdf

Wilson, J., & Kelling, G. (March 1982). Broken Windows – The Police and Neighborhood Safety. The Atlantic Magazine, Retrieved from          http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/4465

Filed under:

Crime Control and Policy Creation

Chris Grollnek

Active Shooter Prevention Policy Expert

About Active Shooter Prevention Expert

Active Shooter Training and Domestic Terrorism Prevention Expert PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY Chris Grollnek is an award winning former lead police investigator and one of the nation’s highly sought Active Shooter Prevention and Physical Security Experts. Through lecturing, training and responding to critical incidents as an independent investigator, at the request of public officials and private entities, Chris assists in shaping public and private safety standards. Recognized as a pivotal leader in security change management strategies, Chris has a proven record of success in implementing strategic policy for both government entities and corporations. He is frequently sought by national media outlets to provide contributing insight on the phenomena of active shooter events and domestic terrorism. Chris is a dynamic, forward-thinking physical security manager and vulnerability analyst.
This entry was posted in Blog and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.