Posted: December 6th, 2022

Discretionary Use of Police Authority

Discretionary Use of Police Authority
Police and Social Order Paper Requirements
Paper #2 Topic- Discretionary Use of Police Authority
Law enforcement offers a plethora of possible topics for research. When choosing a research topic related to law enforcement, it is a good idea to select a topic with current social relevance. Police Discretion is one of those contemporary topics that generates much debate. Do not begin writing a paper with preconceived notions concerning this topic. Once you begin your research, you may find your opinions and your outlook on police discretion changing significantly.
Perspectives on this topic include the historic constitutionality of law enforcement discretionary procedures and contemporary adherence to the Constitution. For example, discuss the myth of full enforcement and the contemporary efforts to define police discretion. In your research you will need to visit and discuss the pros, cons and politics of discretionary authority. Also include the current ways and efforts that are being taken by modern law enforcement agencies to ensure impartiality in the administration of police discretion. Be sure to discuss the determinants of an officer’s discretionary authority. What is the relationship between police discretion and police ethics? Be sure to support your findings with key terms and examples. Discuss the relationship between “zero tolerance” policies and police discretion. The last question you need to answer is; can police discretion be eliminated? Should it be eliminated?

Required: APA format; no more than 7 pages, double-spaced, 12 pt. font
Complete two copies; one printed, and one copy emailed to me before the due date of Friday 10/18 (end of class)
Expectations?
Solid information and research. I expect you to use books other than your textbook, Web sites, and magazine or newspaper articles for your research. These sources should be reflected in the footnotes and bibliography and the information of your paper.
Good research skills. I expect you to use proper footnote and bibliography
form. Have someone proof read your work before submission. You will
submit an emailed version of your paper for me to run through the
plagiarism service.
Good writing skills. You will write your paper with complete sentences and paragraphs, examples to support your statements, good grammar and mechanics and employ proofreading.
Have a separate title page with the title/topic, your name, my name, the course title and the date. Title page does not count as a page. You can put your initials on the other pages if you wish, with the page numbers.
Spell check and proof read your papers. Have a friend, classmate, family member, other staff read your paper to Help you with proofreading. I can’t tell you how annoying it is to read a paper full of typos. Equally annoying is getting a paper full of “random” inappropriate or incorrect words offered by a spell-checker. Look at the words carefully before accepting them.
There is no exception for turning in a paper late. You may always submit it early, if you wish. Late papers will not be accepted. No Late Papers Will Be Accepted
Always make two copies of your paper and keep one for yourself. You are responsible for making sure I get a copy of your paper, so if for some reason I do not, you must be prepared to hand me a copy on a moment’s notice. Also, while writing your paper, always have the most recent version backed up externally on at least one flash drive. You are responsible for covering the possibility of computer or disk failure. You must be prepared for such a contingency.

Discretionary Use of Police Authority
Over the years, research about police behaviours has been carried out focusing on action taken by police officers before making any contact with a suspect. (Roznai, and Albert, 2020). Police decision to make a stop or get in contact with a citizen has raised debates over the years, causing ssues such as racism, gender discrimination, and other forms of discrimination. On the other hand, according to police ethics, police officers cannot cross the thin blue line (Paik, 2017). Police officers are forced to make decisions or use a certain level of discretion while in parole. For instance, police officers can use discretion in deciding whether to shoot, whether to draw a weapon, whether to stop, and asset a person, or whether to make an arrest.
According to Herman Goldstein, full enforcement is a myth because police discretion is essential in law enforcement, especially in situations, where police officers should choose methods of intervention, choose investigation measures, give permits and licences, choose objectives, and choose methods of disposing of a case. According to Kenneth Culp Davis definition, police discretion is the freedom police officers use when no practical limits of power is left, where police officer are forced to decise course of action (Roznai, and Albert, 2020). According to dictionary defination, discretion is the ability of a person to think fit without limitation. Police officers, however, apply various limitation, such as avoiding talking into account race or ethnicity into making decisions. The deception limits allow police officers to maintain ethical codes and make conscientious decisions that respect civil rights.
Public attitude towards police discretion is misinterpreted, with interpretative judgement leading to controversies. For instance, police officers handling a domestic violence issue as a private matter or cases of feminism and child protection (Roznai, Albert, 2020). The police practice of discretion raises issues of discrimination from the public. Police officers can make decisions based on gender in certain situations but cannot be based on ethnicity and religion. The law enforcement department urges police officers to be sensitive in cases of ethnic, culture, and religion while making decisions.
Discretion is considered a foundation in modern policing since the mid-eighteenth century after the development of the nine policing principles by Sir Robert Peel. The nine principles leave room for police discretion, which allows police officers to use reasoning ability in making decisions (Paik, 2017). For instance, a principle that states that police officers should be cautious when using force when maintaining order. Still, when warning, persuasion, and advice has failed, the police may use force. The principle enhances the use of discretion, where a police officer has to exercise legal power to prevent a crime from happening. Use of full enforcement is a myth, where mostly full enforcement may not provide justice or protect the public in certain situations.
According to the Queensland crime, and misconduct Commission (CMC), police exercise of discretion is considered a temporary police code of ethics because police officers use ethics in making decisions. Pragmatically, and normatively, police exercise of discretion is vital in police operations over full enforcement. For instance, discretion is applied when policing resources are not enough to enforce laws against offenders. Also, the exercise of full enforcement would be harsh and intolerable in certain situations; discretion is used for fairness over legislations that are poorly formulated. Lastly policing principles and laws does not cover all aspects of criminality, most laws exclude various criminal activities and ethical dilemmas, and hence discretions used in such conducts.
Additionally, the use of discretion allows law enforcement to be flexible in performing specific duties. Discretion allows police to make a rational decision concerning the nature of the case, significantly where the use of laws may affect the results (Paik, 2017). Also, discretion takes police and judicial economy into consideration, especially when the resources are not enough. Police officers reason and make decisions on what cases should be taken to court, where petty cases maybe death with to prevent overspending. Lastly, discretion allows police officers to act on a situation faster through interpreting the laws and deciding what to do; for instance, in a dangerous situation, the police may decide to shoot or search.
According to Davis, discretion power is more of human nature, where human beings may make decision’s based on feelings and selfish gains. The imperfect human nature may drive police officers into misusing authority or power, especially the use of free choice to make decisions on factors that influence the decision-making process. According to research, culture, technology, and human needs may influence police officers decisions. According to Goldstein, police officers use a cost-benefit approach in making decisions. Police officers consider the likelihood of getting into trouble with the agency and the impact of the decision on the offender. For instance, mediating a couple involved in domestic violence may raise questions whether the family will get into violence again.
On the other hand, police discretion can be corrupt, unethical, and arbitrary, especially when police officers misuse powers (Paik, 2017). Use of discretion may lead to loss of life, mistrust, civil liability, and low morale. Use of discretion should be accompanied with ethical considerations, to maintain public trust. Excessive use of force is a result of inadequate use of discretion authority. Police officers violate ethical standards and professional ethics while practising discretion.
Discretion can lead to loss of life in the application of force, or damages that can lead to civil liabilities. Most police officers use discretion to meet the requirements of Quotas (Tillyer, and Klahm 2015). Quotas are considered unethical because they put too much pressure on police leading to misconducts and unethical situations. Some agencies use quotas to provide dismissal, demotion, and promotions, which is inappropriate. Police officers engage in warrantless searches, inappropriate stops, and arrest to meet the specifications of the quotas. Police misconduct, ethics, and subculture determine police discretion authority, which can provide positive or negative outcomes.
Modern law enforcement agencies have developed policies and strategies for enhancing police impartiality in the administration of police administration. Police officers should treat the public with dignity, being unprejudiced, and though fairness in the application of discretion. Practices (Paik, 2017). For instance, training police officers on ethical considerations, proper use of force, and exercising democratic policing. Also, law enforcement train police officers on creative thinking and decision making, which Help in making rational decisions in a situation that require the application of discretion. Law enforcement advocate for respect and honouring public requests through the application of non-arbitrary professional decision making, and political impartiality. Also, police officers get education and training on self-confidence, professionalism, and how to apply intelligence in professional judgement when making decisions (Paik, 2017). Police officers are advised to operate according to public consent, restrain political influence, accept liability, transparency, and accountability.
Police officers use of discretion authority is determined by four main factors or variables, the offenders variable, involves the factors surrounding the offender, that could have led to the commission of the crime, for instance, social-economic aspect, or insanity. Situational variable, which involves how serious, or petty the offence and the general nature of the offence, including the bystanders and officers present. Criminal justice variable, that considers police sub-culture, and resources, such as police car, and weapons. Lastly, the officer level variable involves the experience, attitude, and age of a police officer. Experienced police officers have mastered various crimes, how to deal with the crime, and the safest way of dealing with the crime.
In contrast, inexperienced police officers consider the use of full enforcement in all situations. On the other hand, officers variable takes police education and period of service into consideration. Also, police use of authority is determined by psychological and social factors surrounding police officers and the offender (Tillyer, and Klahm 2015). The psychological approach focus on the psychological ability of a police officer to make decision’s based on the characteristics of experiences. Also, the police officer may make decisions based on advice from other police officers. Sociological perspective involves the behaviour of police officers and offenders subjected to force before.
For decade reports bout police misconduct has increased, where police officers make unfair judgment and suspicion in most cases (de Maillard, 2020). Crime control should be characterized by police trust, which can be developed through integrity, elimination of negative police sub-cultures, and application of code of ethics. Ethics discretion and professionalism in policing is an area of concern, especially when advocating for police accountability and oversight. Police ethics and police discretion should be used together in making decisions, and selecting the possible course of action. For a police officer to make wise discretional choices, the officer should use ethical considerations.
Police officers are accountable of police misconduct caused by unethical police behaviour and inappropriate use of discretion authority (Paik, 2017). Police officers are expected to uphold professional ethics and morals that Help in unavoidable situations. Ethics Help police officers to restrain from making a decision’s based on the outcome of the decisions. Ethics focus on the outcome of an action. Whether the outcome is according to the laws and requirements of police and whether the outcome is positive according to the perception of a reasonable person, for instance, the decision’s on the use of force (Tillyer, and Klahm 2015).
Law enforcement can come up with ways that would Help police officers use discretion authority effectively through ethical considerations. For instance involve police into the formulation of policies, use of positive disciplinary towards police, offering training on how to apply discretion in a different situation, and development of a particular unit designed to deal with exceptional cases, such as domestic violence(Paik, 2017). Also, the; law enforcement can include ethics into police mission, and daily objectives, formalize ethical-decision making, and implementation of zero-tolerance policies for unethical decision making.
Law enforcement agencies adopt zero-tolerance policies to prevent misconduct and inappropriate use of discretion (de Maillard, 2020). Zero-tolerance policies are strictly designed for policing, where police officers are not allowed to apply discretion authority regardless of the nature of the offence. Zero tolerance law polices also considered as non-discretionary laws (Tillyer, and Klahm 2015). Zero tolerance policies enhance confidence in police officers, reduces crimes and instils fear of crime. Zero tolerance enable police officers to apply full enforcement and avoid making decisions on minor or major cases (de Maillard, 2020). The policies deny police officers the power to exercise discretional authority, which naturally occurs. Zero tolerance receive critics, especially implications on criminal justice resources, such as prison resources, and facilities, prison overcrowding and court workload.
Police discretion should not be eliminated; instead, police ethics should be promoted. Police discretion is essential in police practices when used in the right way, for instance, in solving minor cases. Elimination of police discretion would have huge implications on correctional facilities, such as prison overcrowding, and financial implications (de Maillard, 2020). On the other side, not all crimes should be taken to court, some crimes are private and petty, such as domestic disagreements. Police officers are trained on how to exercise authority, and apply ethics in decision making; hence the criminal justice system should advocate for police integrity and accountability for proper use of discretion authority.

References
de Maillard, J. (2020). Police Powers and Citizens’ Rights: Discretionary Decision-Making in Police Detention. By Layla Skinns (Routledge, 2019, 233pp,£ 120.00). The British Journal of Criminology.
Paik, L. (2017). Discretionary justice. The Wiley‐Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory, 1-2.
Roznai, Y., & Albert, R. (2020). Introduction: Modern Pressures on Constitutionalism. In Constitutionalism Under Extreme Conditions (pp. 1-13). Springer, Cham.
Tillyer, R., & Klahm IV, C. F. (2015). Discretionary searches, the impact of passengers, and the implications for police–minority encounters. Criminal Justice Review, 40(3), 378-396.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Discretionary Use of Police Authority