Community Policing vs Intelligence-Led Policing Essay

Community Policing vs Intelligence-Led Policing - Essay Example With that given perception, community policing and its built-in advantages are a big help to the regular police authorities who already have their hands full. It has to be importantly observed though that, even without this new alternative, the government has to work hand in hand with the local townsmen in its macro responsibility of making life safe and orderly. In another vein, intelligence-led policing is a recent development in the whole criminal justice system. With the rise of the computer and other high technology, statistics and other stored data enhance surveillance activities with emphasis on suspects who are marked as serious threats. Considering that New York is a highly urbanized metropolis with a big population and a wide range of multi-racial mixes, its police functions, and related endeavors must be extensive and effective enough to curb crime and disorder. While the crime rate in this heart of America has materially reduced in the past few years1, it is a known fact that big crimes and the most notorious criminals were, and still are, linked to New York. Taking into account these backdrops, traditional government resources may not be sufficient to prevent, deter and solve mal and misfeasance. It is therefore imperative that intelligence-led policing, which is a state initiative, must be executed together with the cooperation of responsible citizens under the ambit of community policing. Significance of Criminal Case Verdicts Four landmark cases have a significant bearing on the role of the police in society. The case of Mapp v. Ohio highlighted the requirement of a warrant for a search to be valid and that any evidence obtained out of a warrantless search could not be admitted in evidence. Gideon v. Wainwright, the next relevant case, discusses the right of any person to have a lawyer in all instances where a criminal act is being charged. The jurisprudence in Escobedo v. Illinois and Miranda v Arizona laid down similar principles. The case laws under consideration delve on basic personal privileges enshrined in the constitution under the bill of rights. The right of a person as a human being has always been given utmost respect and preference. This is one poignant character of democracy. Indeed, laws in modern civilized environments protect and shelter individual freedom from legal entanglements. Unfortunately, this seeming over-protection puts constraints on police duties and responsibilities. Some peace and order exponents even decry that this attitude about personal rights is, in effect, equivalent to depriving society of a livable surrounding because the power to combat crimes and criminals is hindered in the process. For instance, even if a concerned passerby police officer has all the hints to suspect certain misdeeds inside a nearby building, he cannot just simply barge in and declare an arrest or a search. He has yet to go to the court and get a writ to that effect. What if the suspects are already gone. What if the instruments of the crime were already transported What if any form of obstruction of justice has already been committed.