Word police come from

The police are a constituted body of persons empowered by a state, with the aim to enforce the law, to ensure the safety, health, and possessions of citizens, and to prevent crime and civil disorder.^[1][2] Their lawful powers include arrest and the use of force legitimized by the state via the monopoly on violence. The term is most commonly associated with the police forces of a sovereign state that are authorized to exercise the police power of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility. Police forces are often defined as being separate from the military and other organizations involved in the defense of the state against foreign aggressors; however, gendarmerie are military units charged with civil policing.^[3] Police forces are usually public sector services, funded through taxes.

Law enforcement is only part of policing activity.^[4] Policing has included an array of activities in different situations, but the predominant ones are concerned with the preservation of order.^[5] In some societies, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, these developed within the context of maintaining the class system and the protection of private property.^[6] Police forces have become ubiquitous in modern societies. Nevertheless, their role can be controversial, as they may be involved to varying degrees in corruption, brutality, and the enforcement of authoritarian rule. In response to policing, there is an abolition movement, which see policing as ineffective^[7][8] and damaging to society,^[8][9] and seeks to meet the needs policing is proposed to resolve through other means, often by addressing the causes of crime, like poverty.^{[10][11][12][13][14]}

A police force may also be referred to as a police department, police service, constabulary, gendarmerie, crime prevention, protective services, law enforcement agency, civil guard, or civic guard. Members may be referred to as police officers, troopers, sheriffs, constables, rangers, peace officers or civic/civil guards. Ireland differs from other English-speaking countries by using the Irish language terms Garda (singular) and Gardaí (plural), for both the national police force and its members. The word police is the most universal and similar terms can be seen in many non-English speaking countries.^[15]

Numerous slang terms exist for the police. Many slang terms for police officers are decades or centuries old with lost etymologies. One of the oldest, cop, has largely lost its slang connotations and become a common colloquial term used both by the public and police officers to refer to their profession.^[16]

Etymology

First attested in English in the early 15th century, originally in a range of senses encompassing ‘(public) policy; state; public order’, the word police comes from Middle French police (‘public order, administration, government’),^[17] in turn from Latin politia,^[18] which is the romanization of the Ancient Greek πολιτεία (politeia) ‘citizenship, administration, civil polity’.^[19] This is derived from πόλις (polis) ‘city’.^[20]

History

Ancient

China

Law enforcement in ancient China was carried out by «prefects» for thousands of years since it developed in both the Chu and Jin kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn period. In Jin, dozens of prefects were spread across the state, each having limited authority and employment period. They were appointed by local magistrates, who reported to higher authorities such as governors, who in turn were appointed by the emperor, and they oversaw the civil administration of their «prefecture», or jurisdiction. Under each prefect were «subprefects» who helped collectively with law enforcement in the area. Some prefects were responsible for handling investigations, much like modern police detectives. Prefects could also be women.^[21] Local citizens could report minor judicial offenses against them such as robberies at a local prefectural office. The concept of the «prefecture system» spread to other cultures such as Korea and Japan.

Babylonia

In Babylonia, law enforcement tasks were initially entrusted to individuals with military backgrounds or imperial magnates during the Old Babylonian period, but eventually, law enforcement was delegated to officers known as paqūdus, who were present in both cities and rural settlements. A paqūdu was responsible for investigating petty crimes and carrying out arrests.^[22][23]

Egypt

In ancient Egypt evidence of law enforcement exists as far back as the Old Kingdom period. There are records of an office known as «Judge Commandant of the Police» dating to the fourth dynasty.^[24] During the fifth dynasty at the end of the Old Kingdom period, officers armed with wooden sticks were tasked with guarding public places such as markets, temples, and parks, and apprehending criminals. They are known to have made use of trained monkeys, baboons, and dogs in guard duties and catching criminals. After the Old Kingdom collapsed, ushering in the First Intermediate Period, it is thought that the same model applied. During this period, Bedouins were hired to guard the borders and protect trade caravans. During the Middle Kingdom period, a professional police force was created with a specific focus on enforcing the law, as opposed to the previous informal arrangement of using warriors as police. The police force was further reformed during the New Kingdom period. Police officers served as interrogators, prosecutors, and court bailiffs, and were responsible for administering punishments handed down by judges. In addition, there were special units of police officers trained as priests who were responsible for guarding temples and tombs and preventing inappropriate behavior at festivals or improper observation of religious rites during services. Other police units were tasked with guarding caravans, guarding border crossings, protecting royal necropolises, guarding slaves at work or during transport, patrolling the Nile River, and guarding administrative buildings. By the Eighteenth Dynasty of the New Kingdom period, an elite desert-ranger police force called the Medjay was used to protect valuable areas, especially areas of pharaonic interest like capital cities, royal cemeteries, and the borders of Egypt. Though they are best known for their protection of the royal palaces and tombs in Thebes and the surrounding areas, the Medjay were used throughout Upper and Lower Egypt. Each regional unit had its own captain. The police forces of ancient Egypt did not guard rural communities, which often took care of their own judicial problems by appealing to village elders, but many of them had a constable to enforce state laws.^[25][26]

Greece

In ancient Greece, publicly owned slaves were used by magistrates as police. In Athens, the Scythian Archers (the ῥαβδοῦχοι ‘rod-bearers’), a group of about 300 Scythian slaves, was used to guard public meetings to keep order and for crowd control, and also assisted with dealing with criminals, handling prisoners, and making arrests. Other duties associated with modern policing, such as investigating crimes, were left to the citizens themselves.^[27] Athenian police forces were supervised by the Areopagus. In Sparta, the Ephors were in charge of maintaining public order as judges, and they used Sparta’s Hippeis, a 300-member royal guard of honor, as their enforcers. There were separate authorities supervising women, children, and agricultural issues. Sparta also had a secret police force called the crypteia to watch the large population of helots, or slaves.^[28][29]

Rome

In the Roman Empire, the army played a major role in providing security. Roman soldiers detached from their legions and posted among civilians carried out law enforcement tasks.^[30] Local watchmen were hired by cities to provide some extra security. Magistrates such as tresviri capitales, procurators fiscal and quaestors investigated crimes. There was no concept of public prosecution, so victims of crime or their families had to organize and manage the prosecution themselves. Under the reign of Augustus, when the capital had grown to almost one million inhabitants, 14 wards were created; the wards were protected by seven squads of 1,000 men called vigiles, who acted as night watchmen and firemen. Their duties included apprehending petty criminals, capturing runaway slaves, guarding the baths at night, and stopping disturbances of the peace. The vigiles primarily dealt with petty crime, while violent crime, sedition, and rioting was handled by the Urban Cohorts and even the Praetorian Guard if necessary, though the vigiles could act in a supporting role in these situations.

India

Law enforcement systems existed in the various kingdoms and empires of ancient India. The Apastamba Dharmasutra prescribes that kings should appoint officers and subordinates in the towns and villages to protect their subjects from crime. Various inscriptions and literature from ancient India suggest that a variety of roles existed for law enforcement officials such as those of a constable, thief catcher, watchman, and detective.^[31] In ancient India up to medieval and early modern times, kotwals were in charge of local law enforcement.^[32]

Persian Empire

The Persian Empire had well-organized police forces. A police force existed in every place of importance. In the cities, each ward was under the command of a Superintendent of Police, known as a Kuipan, who was expected to command implicit obedience in his subordinates. Police officers also acted as prosecutors and carried out punishments imposed by the courts. They were required to know the court procedure for prosecuting cases and advancing accusations.^[33]

Israel

In ancient Israel and Judah, officials with the responsibility of making declarations to the people, guarding the king’s person, supervising public works, and executing the orders of the courts existed in the urban areas. They are repeatedly mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, and this system lasted into the period of Roman rule. The first century Jewish historian Josephus related that every judge had two such officers under his command. Levites were preferred for this role. Cities and towns also had night watchmen. Besides officers of the town, there were officers for every tribe. The temple in Jerusalem had special temple police to guard it. The Talmud mentions various local police officials in the Jewish communities of the Land of Israel and Babylon who supervised economic activity. Their Greek-sounding titles suggest that the roles were introduced under Hellenic influence. Most of these officials received their authority from local courts and their salaries were drawn from the town treasury. The Talmud also mentions city watchmen and mounted and armed watchmen in the suburbs.^[34]

Africa

In many regions of pre-colonial Africa, particularly West and Central Africa, guild-like secret societies emerged as law enforcement. In the absence of a court system or written legal code, they carried out police-like activities, employing varying degrees of coercion to enforce conformity and deter antisocial behavior.^[35] In ancient Ethiopia, armed retainers of the nobility enforced law in the countryside according to the will of their leaders. The Songhai Empire had officials known as assara-munidios, or «enforcers», acting as police.^[36]

The Americas

Pre-Columbian civilizations in the Americas also had organized law enforcement. The city-states of the Maya civilization had constables known as tupils, as well as bailiffs.^[37] In the Aztec Empire, judges had officers serving under them who were empowered to perform arrests, even of dignitaries.^[38] In the Inca Empire, officials called curaca enforced the law among the households they were assigned to oversee, with inspectors known as tokoyrikoq (lit. ‘he who sees all’) also stationed throughout the provinces to keep order.^[39][40]

Post-classical

In medieval Spain, Santas Hermandades, or ‘holy brotherhoods’, peacekeeping associations of armed individuals, were a characteristic of municipal life, especially in Castile. As medieval Spanish kings often could not offer adequate protection, protective municipal leagues began to emerge in the twelfth century against banditry and other rural criminals, and against the lawless nobility or to support one or another claimant to a crown.

These organizations were intended to be temporary, but became a long-standing fixture of Spain. The first recorded case of the formation of an hermandad occurred when the towns and the peasantry of the north united to police the pilgrim road to Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, and protect the pilgrims against robber knights.

Throughout the Middle Ages such alliances were frequently formed by combinations of towns to protect the roads connecting them, and were occasionally extended to political purposes. Among the most powerful was the league of North Castilian and Basque ports, the Hermandad de las marismas: Toledo, Talavera, and Villarreal.

As one of their first acts after end of the War of the Castilian Succession in 1479, Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile established the centrally-organized and efficient Holy Brotherhood as a national police force. They adapted an existing brotherhood to the purpose of a general police acting under officials appointed by themselves, and endowed with great powers of summary jurisdiction even in capital cases. The original brotherhoods continued to serve as modest local police-units until their final suppression in 1835.

The Vehmic courts of Germany provided some policing in the absence of strong state institutions. Such courts had a chairman who presided over a session and lay judges who passed judgement and carried out law enforcement tasks. Among the responsibilities that lay judges had were giving formal warnings to known troublemakers, issuing warrants, and carrying out executions.

In the medieval Islamic Caliphates, police were known as Shurta. Bodies termed Shurta existed perhaps as early as the Caliphate of Uthman. The Shurta is known to have existed in the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates. Their primary roles were to act as police and internal security forces but they could also be used for other duties such as customs and tax enforcement, rubbish collection, and acting as bodyguards for governors. From the 10th century, the importance of the Shurta declined as the army assumed internal security tasks while cities became more autonomous and handled their own policing needs locally, such as by hiring watchmen. In addition, officials called muhtasibs were responsible for supervising bazaars and economic activity in general in the medieval Islamic world.

In France during the Middle Ages, there were two Great Officers of the Crown of France with police responsibilities: The Marshal of France and the Grand Constable of France. The military policing responsibilities of the Marshal of France were delegated to the Marshal’s provost, whose force was known as the Marshalcy because its authority ultimately derived from the Marshal. The marshalcy dates back to the Hundred Years’ War, and some historians trace it back to the early 12th century. Another organisation, the Constabulary (Old French: Connétablie), was under the command of the Constable of France. The constabulary was regularised as a military body in 1337. Under Francis I (reigned 1515–1547), the Maréchaussée was merged with the constabulary. The resulting force was also known as the Maréchaussée, or, formally, the Constabulary and Marshalcy of France.

The English system of maintaining public order since the Norman conquest was a private system of tithings known as the mutual pledge system. This system was introduced under Alfred the Great. Communities were divided into groups of ten families called tithings, each of which was overseen by a chief tithingman. Every household head was responsible for the good behavior of his own family and the good behavior of other members of his tithing. Every male aged 12 and over was required to participate in a tithing. Members of tithings were responsible for raising «hue and cry» upon witnessing or learning of a crime, and the men of his tithing were responsible for capturing the criminal. The person the tithing captured would then be brought before the chief tithingman, who would determine guilt or innocence and punishment. All members of the criminal’s tithing would be responsible for paying the fine. A group of ten tithings was known as a «hundred» and every hundred was overseen by an official known as a reeve. Hundreds ensured that if a criminal escaped to a neighboring village, he could be captured and returned to his village. If a criminal was not apprehended, then the entire hundred could be fined. The hundreds were governed by administrative divisions known as shires, the rough equivalent of a modern county, which were overseen by an official known as a shire-reeve, from which the term sheriff evolved. The shire-reeve had the power of posse comitatus, meaning he could gather the men of his shire to pursue a criminal.^[41] Following the Norman conquest of England in 1066, the tithing system was tightened with the frankpledge system. By the end of the 13th century, the office of constable developed. Constables had the same responsibilities as chief tithingmen and additionally as royal officers. The constable was elected by his parish every year. Eventually, constables became the first ‘police’ official to be tax-supported. In urban areas, watchmen were tasked with keeping order and enforcing nighttime curfew. Watchmen guarded the town gates at night, patrolled the streets, arrested those on the streets at night without good reason, and also acted as firefighters. Eventually the office of justice of the peace was established, with a justice of the peace overseeing constables.^[42][43] There was also a system of investigative «juries».

The Assize of Arms of 1252, which required the appointment of constables to summon men to arms, quell breaches of the peace, and to deliver offenders to the sheriff or reeve, is cited as one of the earliest antecedents of the English police.^[44] The Statute of Winchester of 1285 is also cited as the primary legislation regulating the policing of the country between the Norman Conquest and the Metropolitan Police Act 1829.^[44][45]

From about 1500, private watchmen were funded by private individuals and organisations to carry out police functions. They were later nicknamed ‘Charlies’, probably after the reigning monarch King Charles II. Thief-takers were also rewarded for catching thieves and returning the stolen property. They were private individuals usually hired by crime victims.

The earliest English use of the word police seems to have been the term Polles mentioned in the book The Second Part of the Institutes of the Lawes of England published in 1642.^[46]

Early modern

The first centrally organised and uniformed police force was created by the government of King Louis XIV in 1667 to police the city of Paris, then the largest city in Europe. The royal edict, registered by the Parlement of Paris on March 15, 1667, created the office of lieutenant général de police («lieutenant general of police»), who was to be the head of the new Paris police force, and defined the task of the police as «ensuring the peace and quiet of the public and of private individuals, purging the city of what may cause disturbances, procuring abundance, and having each and everyone live according to their station and their duties».

This office was first held by Gabriel Nicolas de la Reynie, who had 44 commissaires de police (‘police commissioners’) under his authority. In 1709, these commissioners were assisted by inspecteurs de police (‘police inspectors’). The city of Paris was divided into 16 districts policed by the commissaires, each assigned to a particular district and assisted by a growing bureaucracy. The scheme of the Paris police force was extended to the rest of France by a royal edict of October 1699, resulting in the creation of lieutenants general of police in all large French cities and towns.

After the French Revolution, Napoléon I reorganized the police in Paris and other cities with more than 5,000 inhabitants on February 17, 1800, as the Prefecture of Police. On March 12, 1829, a government decree created the first uniformed police in France, known as sergents de ville (‘city sergeants’), which the Paris Prefecture of Police’s website claims were the first uniformed policemen in the world.^[47]

In feudal Japan, samurai warriors were charged with enforcing the law among commoners. Some Samurai acted as magistrates called Machi-bugyō, who acted as judges, prosecutors, and as chief of police. Beneath them were other Samurai serving as yoriki, or assistant magistrates, who conducted criminal investigations, and beneath them were Samurai serving as dōshin, who were responsible for patrolling the streets, keeping the peace, and making arrests when necessary. The yoriki were responsible for managing the dōshin. Yoriki and dōshin were typically drawn from low-ranking samurai families. This system typically did not apply to the Samurai themselves. Samurai clans were expected to resolve disputes among each other through negotiation, or when that failed through duels. Only rarely did Samurai bring their disputes to a magistrate or answer to police.^[48] Assisting the dōshin were the komono, non-Samurai chōnin who went on patrol with them and provided assistance, the okappiki, non-Samurai from the lowest outcast class, often former criminals, who worked for them as informers and spies, and gōyokiki or meakashi, chōnin, often former criminals, who were hired by local residents and merchants to work as police assistants in a particular neighborhood.^[49][50]

In Sweden, local governments were responsible for law and order by way of a royal decree issued by Magnus III in the 13th century. The cities financed and organized groups of watchmen who patrolled the streets. In the late 1500s in Stockholm, patrol duties were in large part taken over by a special corps of salaried city guards. The city guard was organized, uniformed and armed like a military unit and was responsible for interventions against various crimes and the arrest of suspected criminals. These guards were assisted by the military, fire patrolmen, and a civilian unit that did not wear a uniform, but instead wore a small badge around the neck. The civilian unit monitored compliance with city ordinances relating to e.g. sanitation issues, traffic and taxes. In rural areas, the King’s bailiffs were responsible for law and order until the establishment of counties in the 1630s.^[51][52]

Up to the early 18th century, the level of state involvement in law enforcement in Britain was low. Although some law enforcement officials existed in the form of constables and watchmen, there was no organized police force. A professional police force like the one already present in France would have been ill-suited to Britain, which saw examples such as the French one as a threat to the people’s liberty and balanced constitution in favor of an arbitrary and tyrannical government. Law enforcement was mostly up to the private citizens, who had the right and duty to prosecute crimes in which they were involved or in which they were not. At the cry of ‘murder!’ or ‘stop thief!’ everyone was entitled and obliged to join the pursuit. Once the criminal had been apprehended, the parish constables and night watchmen, who were the only public figures provided by the state and who were typically part-time and local, would make the arrest.^[53] As a result, the state set a reward to encourage citizens to arrest and prosecute offenders. The first of such rewards was established in 1692 of the amount of £40 for the conviction of a highwayman and in the following years it was extended to burglars, coiners and other forms of offense. The reward was to be increased in 1720 when, after the end of the War of the Spanish Succession and the consequent rise of criminal offenses, the government offered £100 for the conviction of a highwayman. Although the offer of such a reward was conceived as an incentive for the victims of an offense to proceed to the prosecution and to bring criminals to justice, the efforts of the government also increased the number of private thief-takers. Thief-takers became infamously known not so much for what they were supposed to do, catching real criminals and prosecuting them, as for «setting themselves up as intermediaries between victims and their attackers, extracting payments for the return of stolen goods and using the threat of prosecution to keep offenders in thrall». Some of them, such as Jonathan Wild, became infamous at the time for staging robberies in order to receive the reward.^[54][55]

In 1737, George II began paying some London and Middlesex watchmen with tax monies, beginning the shift to government control. In 1749, Judge Henry Fielding began organizing a force of quasi-professional constables known as the Bow Street Runners. The Bow Street Runners are considered to have been Britain’s first dedicated police force. They represented a formalization and regularization of existing policing methods, similar to the unofficial ‘thief-takers’. What made them different was their formal attachment to the Bow Street magistrates’ office, and payment by the magistrate with funds from the central government. They worked out of Fielding’s office and court at No. 4 Bow Street, and did not patrol but served writs and arrested offenders on the authority of the magistrates, travelling nationwide to apprehend criminals. Fielding wanted to regulate and legalize law enforcement activities due to the high rate of corruption and mistaken or malicious arrests seen with the system that depended mainly on private citizens and state rewards for law enforcement. Henry Fielding’s work was carried on by his brother, Justice John Fielding, who succeeded him as magistrate in the Bow Street office. Under John Fielding, the institution of the Bow Street Runners gained more and more recognition from the government, although the force was only funded intermittently in the years that followed. In 1763, the Bow Street Horse Patrol was established to combat highway robbery, funded by a government grant. The Bow Street Runners served as the guiding principle for the way that policing developed over the next 80 years. Bow Street was a manifestation of the move towards increasing professionalisation and state control of street life, beginning in London.

The Macdaniel affair, a 1754 British political scandal in which a group of thief-takers was found to be falsely prosecuting innocent men in order to collect reward money from bounties,^[56] added further impetus for a publicly salaried police force that did not depend on rewards. Nonetheless, In 1828, there were privately financed police units in no fewer than 45 parishes within a 10-mile radius of London.

The word police was borrowed from French into the English language in the 18th century, but for a long time it applied only to French and continental European police forces. The word, and the concept of police itself, were «disliked as a symbol of foreign oppression».^[57] Before the 19th century, the first use of the word police recorded in government documents in the United Kingdom was the appointment of Commissioners of Police for Scotland in 1714 and the creation of the Marine Police in 1798.

Modern

Scotland and Ireland

Following early police forces established in 1779 and 1788 in Glasgow, Scotland, the Glasgow authorities successfully petitioned the government to pass the Glasgow Police Act establishing the City of Glasgow Police in 1800.^[58] Other Scottish towns soon followed suit and set up their own police forces through acts of parliament.^[59] In Ireland, the Irish Constabulary Act of 1822 marked the beginning of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The Act established a force in each barony with chief constables and inspectors general under the control of the civil administration at Dublin Castle. By 1841 this force numbered over 8,600 men.

London

In 1797, Patrick Colquhoun was able to persuade the West Indies merchants who operated at the Pool of London on the River Thames to establish a police force at the docks to prevent rampant theft that was causing annual estimated losses of £500,000 worth of cargo.^[60] The idea of a police, as it then existed in France, was considered as a potentially undesirable foreign import. In building the case for the police in the face of England’s firm anti-police sentiment, Colquhoun framed the political rationale on economic indicators to show that a police dedicated to crime prevention was «perfectly congenial to the principle of the British constitution». Moreover, he went so far as to praise the French system, which had reached «the greatest degree of perfection» in his estimation.^[61]

With the initial investment of £4,200, the new force the Marine Police began with about 50 men charged with policing 33,000 workers in the river trades, of whom Colquhoun claimed 11,000 were known criminals and «on the game». The force was part funded by the London Society of West India Planters and Merchants. The force was a success after its first year, and his men had «established their worth by saving £122,000 worth of cargo and by the rescuing of several lives». Word of this success spread quickly, and the government passed the Depredations on the Thames Act 1800 on 28 July 1800, establishing a fully funded police force the Thames River Police together with new laws including police powers; now the oldest police force in the world. Colquhoun published a book on the experiment, The Commerce and Policing of the River Thames. It found receptive audiences far outside London, and inspired similar forces in other cities, notably, New York City, Dublin, and Sydney.^[60]

Colquhoun’s utilitarian approach to the problem – using a cost-benefit argument to obtain support from businesses standing to benefit – allowed him to achieve what Henry and John Fielding failed for their Bow Street detectives. Unlike the stipendiary system at Bow Street, the river police were full-time, salaried officers prohibited from taking private fees.^[62] His other contribution was the concept of preventive policing; his police were to act as a highly visible deterrent to crime by their permanent presence on the Thames.^[61] Colquhoun’s innovations were a critical development leading up to Robert Peel’s «new» police three decades later.^{[citation needed]}

Metropolitan

London was fast reaching a size unprecedented in world history, due to the onset of the Industrial Revolution.^[63] It became clear that the locally maintained system of volunteer constables and «watchmen» was ineffective, both in detecting and preventing crime. A parliamentary committee was appointed to investigate the system of policing in London. Upon Sir Robert Peel being appointed as Home Secretary in 1822, he established a second and more effective committee, and acted upon its findings.

Royal assent to the Metropolitan Police Act 1829 was given^[64] and the Metropolitan Police Service was established on September 29, 1829, in London.^[65][66] Peel, widely regarded as the father of modern policing,^[67] was heavily influenced by the social and legal philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, who called for a strong and centralised, but politically neutral, police force for the maintenance of social order, for the protection of people from crime and to act as a visible deterrent to urban crime and disorder.^[68] Peel decided to standardise the police force as an official paid profession, to organise it in a civilian fashion, and to make it answerable to the public.^[69]

Due to public fears concerning the deployment of the military in domestic matters, Peel organised the force along civilian lines, rather than paramilitary. To appear neutral, the uniform was deliberately manufactured in blue, rather than red which was then a military colour, along with the officers being armed only with a wooden truncheon and a rattle^[70] to signal the need for assistance. Along with this, police ranks did not include military titles, with the exception of Sergeant.

To distance the new police force from the initial public view of it as a new tool of government repression, Peel publicised the so-called Peelian principles, which set down basic guidelines for ethical policing:^[71][72]

• Whether the police are effective is not measured on the number of arrests but on the deterrence of crime.
• Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. Hence, Peel’s most often quoted principle that «The police are the public and the public are the police.»

The 1829 Metropolitan Police Act created a modern police force by limiting the purview of the force and its powers, and envisioning it as merely an organ of the judicial system. Their job was apolitical; to maintain the peace and apprehend criminals for the courts to process according to the law.^[73] This was very different from the «continental model» of the police force that had been developed in France, where the police force worked within the parameters of the absolutist state as an extension of the authority of the monarch and functioned as part of the governing state.

In 1863, the Metropolitan Police were issued with the distinctive custodian helmet, and in 1884 they switched to the use of whistles that could be heard from much further away.^[74] The Metropolitan Police became a model for the police forces in many countries, including the United States and most of the British Empire.^[75][76] Bobbies can still be found in many parts of the Commonwealth of Nations.

Australia

In Australia, organized law enforcement emerged soon after British colonization began in 1788. The first law enforcement organizations were the Night Watch and Row Boat Guard, which were formed in 1789 to police Sydney. Their ranks were drawn from well-behaved convicts deported to Australia. The Night Watch was replaced by the Sydney Foot Police in 1790. In New South Wales, rural law enforcement officials were appointed by local justices of the peace during the early to mid 19th century, and were referred to as «bench police» or «benchers». A mounted police force was formed in 1825.^[77]

The first police force having centralised command as well as jurisdiction over an entire colony was the South Australia Police, formed in 1838 under Henry Inman. However, whilst the New South Wales Police Force was established in 1862, it was made up from a large number of policing and military units operating within the then Colony of New South Wales and traces its links back to the Royal Marines. The passing of the Police Regulation Act of 1862 essentially tightly regulated and centralised all of the police forces operating throughout the Colony of New South Wales.

Each Australian state and territory maintains its own police force, while the Australian Federal Police enforces laws at the federal level. The New South Wales Police Force remains the largest police force in Australia in terms of personnel and physical resources. It is also the only police force that requires its recruits to undertake university studies at the recruit level and has the recruit pay for their own education.

Brazil

In 1566, the first police investigator of Rio de Janeiro was recruited. By the 17th century, most captaincies already had local units with law enforcement functions. On July 9, 1775, a Cavalry Regiment was created in the state of Minas Gerais for maintaining law and order. In 1808, the Portuguese royal family relocated to Brazil, because of the French invasion of Portugal. King João VI established the Intendência Geral de Polícia (‘General Police Intendancy’) for investigations. He also created a Royal Police Guard for Rio de Janeiro in 1809. In 1831, after independence, each province started organizing its local «military police», with order maintenance tasks. The Federal Railroad Police was created in 1852, Federal Highway Police, was established in 1928, and Federal Police in 1967.

Canada

During the early days of English and French colonization, municipalities hired watchmen and constables to provide security.^[78] Established in 1729, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC) was the first policing service founded in Canada. The establishment of modern policing services in the Canadas occurred during the 1830s, modelling their services after the London Metropolitan Police, and adopting the ideas of the Peelian principles.^[79] The Toronto Police Service was established in 1834, whereas the Service de police de la Ville de Québec was established in 1840.^[79]

A national police service, the Dominion Police, was founded in 1868. Initially the Dominion Police provided security for parliament, but its responsibilities quickly grew. In 1870, Rupert’s Land and the North-Western Territory were incorporated into the country. In an effort to police its newly acquired territory, the Canadian government established the North-West Mounted Police in 1873 (renamed Royal North-West Mounted Police in 1904).^[79] In 1920, the Dominion Police, and the Royal Northwest Mounted Police were amalgamated into the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).^[79]

The RCMP provides federal law enforcement; and law enforcement in eight provinces, and all three territories. The provinces of Ontario, and Quebec maintain their own provincial police forces, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), and the Sûreté du Québec (SQ). Policing in Newfoundland and Labrador is provided by the RCMP, and the RNC. The aforementioned services also provides municipal policing, although larger Canadian municipalities may establish their own police service.

Lebanon

In Lebanon, the current police force was established in 1861, with creation of the Gendarmerie.^[80]

India

In India, the police are under the control of respective States and union territories and is known to be under State Police Services (SPS). The candidates selected for the SPS are usually posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police or Assistant Commissioner of Police once their probationary period ends. On prescribed satisfactory service in the SPS, the officers are nominated to the Indian Police Service.^[81] The service color is usually dark blue and red, while the uniform color is Khaki.^[82]

United States

In Colonial America, the county sheriff was the most important law enforcement official. For instance, the New York Sheriff’s Office was founded in 1626, and the Albany County Sheriff’s Department in the 1660s. The county sheriff, who was an elected official, was responsible for enforcing laws, collecting taxes, supervising elections, and handling the legal business of the county government. Sheriffs would investigate crimes and make arrests after citizens filed complaints or provided information about a crime, but did not carry out patrols or otherwise take preventive action. Villages and cities typically hired constables and marshals, who were empowered to make arrests and serve warrants. Many municipalities also formed a night watch, or group of citizen volunteers who would patrol the streets at night looking for crime or fires. Typically, constables and marshals were the main law enforcement officials available during the day while the night watch would serve during the night. Eventually, municipalities formed day watch groups. Rioting was handled by local militias.^[83][84]

In the 1700s, the Province of Carolina (later North- and South Carolina) established slave patrols in order to prevent slave rebellions and enslaved people from escaping.^[85][86] By 1785 the Charleston Guard and Watch had «a distinct chain of command, uniforms, sole responsibility for policing, salary, authorized use of force, and a focus on preventing crime.»^[87]

In 1789 the United States Marshals Service was established, followed by other federal services such as the U.S. Parks Police (1791)^[88] and U.S. Mint Police (1792).^[89] The first city police services were established in Philadelphia in 1751,^[90] Richmond, Virginia in 1807,^[91] Boston in 1838,^[92] and New York in 1845.^[93] The U.S. Secret Service was founded in 1865 and was for some time the main investigative body for the federal government.^[94]

In the American Old West, law enforcement was carried out by local sheriffs, rangers, constables, and federal marshals. There were also town marshals responsible for serving civil and criminal warrants, maintaining the jails, and carrying out arrests for petty crime.^[95][96]

In addition to federal, state, and local forces, some special districts have been formed to provide extra police protection in designated areas. These districts may be known as neighborhood improvement districts, crime prevention districts, or security districts.^[97]

In 2022, San Francisco supervisors approved allowing local police to use robots, and stipulates that can «be used as a deadly force option.»^[98] This policy has been criticized by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU stipulating that «killer robots will not make San Francisco better» and «police might even bring armed robots to a protest.»^[99][100]

Development of theory

Michel Foucault wrote that the contemporary concept of police as a paid and funded functionary of the state was developed by German and French legal scholars and practitioners in public administration and statistics in the 17th and early 18th centuries, most notably with Nicolas Delamare’s Traité de la Police («Treatise on the Police»), first published in 1705. The German Polizeiwissenschaft (Science of Police) first theorized by Philipp von Hörnigk, a 17th-century Austrian political economist and civil servant, and much more famously by Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi, who produced an important theoretical work known as Cameral science on the formulation of police.^[101] Foucault cites Magdalene Humpert author of Bibliographie der Kameralwissenschaften (1937) in which the author makes note of a substantial bibliography was produced of over 4,000 pieces of the practice of Polizeiwissenschaft. However, this may be a mistranslation of Foucault’s own work since the actual source of Magdalene Humpert states over 14,000 items were produced from the 16th century dates ranging from 1520 to 1850.^[102][103]

As conceptualized by the Polizeiwissenschaft, according to Foucault the police had an administrative, economic and social duty («procuring abundance»). It was in charge of demographic concerns^[vague] and needed to be incorporated within the western political philosophy system of raison d’état and therefore giving the superficial appearance of empowering the population (and unwittingly supervising the population), which, according to mercantilist theory, was to be the main strength of the state. Thus, its functions largely overreached simple law enforcement activities and included public health concerns, urban planning (which was important because of the miasma theory of disease; thus, cemeteries were moved out of town, etc.), and surveillance of prices.^[104]

The concept of preventive policing, or policing to deter crime from taking place, gained influence in the late 18th century. Police Magistrate John Fielding, head of the Bow Street Runners, argued that «…it is much better to prevent even one man from being a rogue than apprehending and bringing forty to justice.»^[105]

The Utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, promoted the views of Italian Marquis Cesare Beccaria, and disseminated a translated version of «Essay on Crime in Punishment». Bentham espoused the guiding principle of «the greatest good for the greatest number»:

It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them. This is the chief aim of every good system of legislation, which is the art of leading men to the greatest possible happiness or to the least possible misery, according to calculation of all the goods and evils of life.^[105]

Patrick Colquhoun’s influential work, A Treatise on the Police of the Metropolis (1797) was heavily influenced by Benthamite thought. Colquhoun’s Thames River Police was founded on these principles, and in contrast to the Bow Street Runners, acted as a deterrent by their continual presence on the riverfront, in addition to being able to intervene if they spotted a crime in progress.^[106]

Edwin Chadwick’s 1829 article, «Preventive police» in the London Review,^[107] argued that prevention ought to be the primary concern of a police body, which was not the case in practice. The reason, argued Chadwick, was that «A preventive police would act more immediately by placing difficulties in obtaining the objects of temptation.» In contrast to a deterrent of punishment, a preventive police force would deter criminality by making crime cost-ineffective – «crime doesn’t pay». In the second draft of his 1829 Police Act, the «object» of the new Metropolitan Police, was changed by Robert Peel to the «principal object,» which was the «prevention of crime.»^[108] Later historians would attribute the perception of England’s «appearance of orderliness and love of public order» to the preventive principle entrenched in Peel’s police system.^[109]

Development of modern police forces around the world was contemporary to the formation of the state, later defined by sociologist Max Weber as achieving a «monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force» and which was primarily exercised by the police and the military. Marxist theory situates the development of the modern state as part of the rise of capitalism, in which the police are one component of the bourgeoisie’s repressive apparatus for subjugating the working class. By contrast, the Peelian principles argue that «the power of the police … is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior», a philosophy known as policing by consent.

Personnel and organization

Police forces include both preventive (uniformed) police and detectives. Terminology varies from country to country. Police functions include protecting life and property, enforcing criminal law, criminal investigations, regulating traffic, crowd control, public safety duties, civil defense, emergency management, searching for missing persons, lost property and other duties concerned with public order. Regardless of size, police forces are generally organized as a hierarchy with multiple ranks. The exact structures and the names of rank vary considerably by country.

Uniformed

The police who wear uniforms make up the majority of a police service’s personnel. Their main duty is to respond to calls for service. When not responding to these calls, they do work aimed at preventing crime, such as patrols. The uniformed police are known by varying names such as preventive police, the uniform branch/division, administrative police, order police, the patrol bureau/division, or patrol. In Australia and the United Kingdom, patrol personnel are also known as «general duties» officers.^[110] Atypically, Brazil’s preventive police are known as Military Police.^[111]

As stated by the name, uniformed police wear uniforms. They perform functions that require an immediate recognition of an officer’s legal authority and a potential need for force. Most commonly this means intervening to stop a crime in progress and securing the scene of a crime that has already happened. Besides dealing with crime, these officers may also manage and monitor traffic, carry out community policing duties, maintain order at public events or carry out searches for missing people (in 2012, the latter accounted for 14% of police time in the United Kingdom).^[112] As most of these duties must be available as a 24/7 service, uniformed police are required to do shift work.

Detectives

Police detectives are responsible for investigations and detective work. Detectives may be called Investigations Police, Judiciary/Judicial Police, or Criminal Police. In the United Kingdom, they are often referred to by the name of their department, the Criminal Investigation Department. Detectives typically make up roughly 15–25% of a police service’s personnel.

Detectives, in contrast to uniformed police, typically wear business-styled attire in bureaucratic and investigative functions, where a uniformed presence would be either a distraction or intimidating but a need to establish police authority still exists. «Plainclothes» officers dress in attire consistent with that worn by the general public for purposes of blending in.

In some cases, police are assigned to work «undercover», where they conceal their police identity to investigate crimes, such as organized crime or narcotics crime, that are unsolvable by other means. In some cases, this type of policing shares aspects with espionage.

The relationship between detective and uniformed branches varies by country. In the United States, there is high variation within the country itself. Many American police departments require detectives to spend some time on temporary assignments in the patrol division.^{[citation needed][113]} The argument is that rotating officers helps the detectives to better understand the uniformed officers’ work, to promote cross-training in a wider variety of skills, and prevent «cliques» that can contribute to corruption or other unethical behavior.^{[citation needed]} Conversely, some countries regard detective work as being an entirely separate profession, with detectives working in separate agencies and recruited without having to serve in uniform. A common compromise in English-speaking countries is that most detectives are recruited from the uniformed branch, but once qualified they tend to spend the rest of their careers in the detective branch.

Another point of variation is whether detectives have extra status. In some forces, such as the New York Police Department and Philadelphia Police Department, a regular detective holds a higher rank than a regular police officer. In others, such as British police and Canadian police, a regular detective has equal status with regular uniformed officers. Officers still have to take exams to move to the detective branch, but the move is regarded as being a specialization, rather than a promotion.

Volunteers and auxiliary

Police services often include part-time or volunteer officers, some of whom have other jobs outside policing. These may be paid positions or entirely volunteer. These are known by a variety of names, such as reserves, auxiliary police or special constables.

Other volunteer organizations work with the police and perform some of their duties. Groups in the U.S. including the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, Community Emergency Response Team, and the Boy Scouts Police Explorers provide training, traffic and crowd control, disaster response, and other policing duties. In the U.S., the Volunteers in Police Service program assists over 200,000 volunteers in almost 2,000 programs.^[114] Volunteers may also work on the support staff. Examples of these schemes are Volunteers in Police Service in the US, Police Support Volunteers in the UK and Volunteers in Policing in New South Wales.

Specialized

Specialized preventive and detective groups, or Specialist Investigation Departments, exist within many law enforcement organizations either for dealing with particular types of crime, such as traffic law enforcement, K9/use of police dogs, crash investigation, homicide, or fraud; or for situations requiring specialized skills, such as underwater search, aviation, explosive disposal («bomb squad»), and computer crime.

Most larger jurisdictions employ police tactical units, specially selected and trained paramilitary units with specialized equipment, weapons, and training, for the purposes of dealing with particularly violent situations beyond the capability of a patrol officer response, including standoffs, counterterrorism, and rescue operations.

In counterinsurgency-type campaigns, select and specially trained units of police armed and equipped as light infantry have been designated as police field forces who perform paramilitary-type patrols and ambushes whilst retaining their police powers in areas that were highly dangerous.^[115]

Because their situational mandate typically focuses on removing innocent bystanders from dangerous people and dangerous situations, not violent resolution, they are often equipped with non-lethal tactical tools like chemical agents, stun grenades, and rubber bullets. The Specialist Firearms Command (CO19)^[116] of the Metropolitan Police in London is a group of armed police used in dangerous situations including hostage taking, armed robbery/assault and terrorism.

Administrative duties

Police may have administrative duties that are not directly related to enforcing the law, such as issuing firearms licenses. The extent that police have these functions varies among countries, with police in France, Germany, and other continental European countries handling such tasks to a greater extent than British counterparts.^[110]

Military

Military police may refer to:

• a section of the military solely responsible for policing the armed forces, referred to as provosts (e.g. United States Air Force Security Forces)
• a section of the military responsible for policing in both the armed forces and in the civilian population (e.g. most gendarmeries, such as the French Gendarmerie, the Italian Carabinieri, the Spanish Guardia Civil, and the Portuguese National Republican Guard)
• a section of the military solely responsible for policing the civilian population (e.g. Romanian Gendarmerie)
• the civilian preventive police of a Brazilian state (e.g. Policia Militar)
• a special military law enforcement service (e.g. Russian Military Police)

Religious

Some jurisdictions with religious laws may have dedicated religious police to enforce said laws. These religious police forces, which may operate either as a unit of a wider police force or as an independent agency, may only have jurisdiction over members of said religion, or they may have the ability to enforce religious customs nationwide regardless of individual religious beliefs.

Religious police may enforce social norms, gender roles, dress codes, and dietary laws per religious doctrine and laws, and may also prohibit practices that run contrary to said doctrine, such as atheism, proselytism, homosexuality, socialization between different genders, business operations during religious periods or events such as salah or the Sabbath, or the sale and possession of «offending material» ranging from pornography to foreign media.^[117][118]

Forms of religious law enforcement were relatively common in historical religious civilizations, but eventually declined in favor of religious tolerance and pluralism. One of the most common forms of religious police in the modern world are Islamic religious police, which enforce the application of Sharia (Islamic religious law). As of 2018, there are eight Islamic countries that maintain Islamic religious police: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Mauritania, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Yemen.^[119]

Some forms of religious police may not enforce religious law, but rather suppress religion or religious extremism. This is often done for ideological reasons; for example, communist states such as China and Vietnam have historically suppressed and tightly-controlled religions such as Christianity.

Secret

Secret police organizations are typically used to suppress dissidents for engaging in non-politically correct communications and activities, which are deemed counter-productive to what the state and related establishment promote. Secret police interventions to stop such activities are often illegal, and are designed to debilitate, in various ways, the people targeted in order to limit or stop outright their ability to act in a non-politically correct manner.^[120] The methods employed may involve spying, various acts of deception, intimidation, framing, false imprisonment, false incarceration under mental health legislation, and physical violence.^[121] Countries widely reported to use secret police organizations include China^[122] (The Ministry of State Security) and North Korea (The Ministry of State Security).^[123]

By country

Police forces are usually organized and funded by some level of government. The level of government responsible for policing varies from place to place, and may be at the national, regional or local level. Some countries have police forces that serve the same territory, with their jurisdiction depending on the type of crime or other circumstances. Other countries, such as Austria, Chile, Israel, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Africa and Sweden, have a single national police force.^[124]

In some places with multiple national police forces, one common arrangement is to have a civilian police force and a paramilitary gendarmerie, such as the Police Nationale and National Gendarmerie in France.^[110] The French policing system spread to other countries through the Napoleonic Wars^[125] and the French colonial empire.^[126][127] Another example is the Policía Nacional and Guardia Civil in Spain. In both France and Spain, the civilian force polices urban areas and the paramilitary force polices rural areas. Italy has a similar arrangement with the Polizia di Stato and Carabinieri, though their jurisdictions overlap more. Some countries have separate agencies for uniformed police and detectives, such as the Military Police and Civil Police in Brazil and the Carabineros and Investigations Police in Chile.

Other countries have sub-national police forces, but for the most part their jurisdictions do not overlap. In many countries, especially federations, there may be two or more tiers of police force, each serving different levels of government and enforcing different subsets of the law. In Australia and Germany, the majority of policing is carried out by state (i.e. provincial) police forces, which are supplemented by a federal police force. Though not a federation, the United Kingdom has a similar arrangement, where policing is primarily the responsibility of a regional police force and specialist units exist at the national level. In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are the federal police, while municipalities can decide whether to run a local police service or to contract local policing duties to a larger one. Most urban areas have a local police service, while most rural areas contract it to the RCMP, or to the provincial police in Ontario and Quebec.

The United States has a highly decentralized and fragmented system of law enforcement, with over 17,000 state and local law enforcement agencies.^[128] These agencies include local police, county law enforcement (often in the form of a sheriff’s office, or county police), state police and federal law enforcement agencies. Federal agencies, such as the FBI, only have jurisdiction over federal crimes or those that involve more than one state. Other federal agencies have jurisdiction over a specific type of crime. Examples include the Federal Protective Service, which patrols and protects government buildings; the Postal Inspection Service, which protect United States Postal Service facilities, vehicles and items; the Park Police, which protect national parks; and Amtrak Police, which patrol Amtrak stations and trains. There are also some government agencies and uniformed services that perform police functions in addition to other duties, such as the Coast Guard.

International

Most countries are members of the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), established to detect and fight transnational crime and provide for international co-operation and co-ordination of other police activities, such as notifying relatives of the death of foreign nationals. Interpol does not conduct investigations or arrests by itself, but only serves as a central point for information on crime, suspects and criminals. Political crimes are excluded from its competencies.

The terms international policing, transnational policing, and/or global policing began to be used from the early 1990s onwards to describe forms of policing that transcended the boundaries of the sovereign nation-state.^[129][130] These terms refer in variable ways to practices and forms for policing that, in some sense, transcend national borders. This includes a variety of practices, but international police cooperation, criminal intelligence exchange between police agencies working in different nation-states, and police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states are the three types that have received the most scholarly attention.

Historical studies reveal that policing agents have undertaken a variety of cross-border police missions for many years.^[131] For example, in the 19th century a number of European policing agencies undertook cross-border surveillance because of concerns about anarchist agitators and other political radicals. A notable example of this was the occasional surveillance by Prussian police of Karl Marx during the years he remained resident in London. The interests of public police agencies in cross-border co-operation in the control of political radicalism and ordinary law crime were primarily initiated in Europe, which eventually led to the establishment of Interpol before World War II. There are also many interesting examples of cross-border policing under private auspices and by municipal police forces that date back to the 19th century.^[129] It has been established that modern policing has transgressed national boundaries from time to time almost from its inception. It is also generally agreed that in the post–Cold War era this type of practice became more significant and frequent.^[132]

Few empirical work on the practices of inter/transnational information and intelligence sharing has been undertaken. A notable exception is James Sheptycki’s study of police cooperation in the English Channel region,^[133] which provides a systematic content analysis of information exchange files and a description of how these transnational information and intelligence exchanges are transformed into police case-work. The study showed that transnational police information sharing was routinized in the cross-Channel region from 1968 on the basis of agreements directly between the police agencies and without any formal agreement between the countries concerned. By 1992, with the signing of the Schengen Treaty, which formalized aspects of police information exchange across the territory of the European Union, there were worries that much, if not all, of this intelligence sharing was opaque, raising questions about the efficacy of the accountability mechanisms governing police information sharing in Europe.^[134]

Studies of this kind outside of Europe are even rarer, so it is difficult to make generalizations, but one small-scale study that compared transnational police information and intelligence sharing practices at specific cross-border locations in North America and Europe confirmed that the low visibility of police information and intelligence sharing was a common feature.^[135] Intelligence-led policing is now common practice in most advanced countries^[136] and it is likely that police intelligence sharing and information exchange has a common morphology around the world.^[136] James Sheptycki has analyzed the effects of the new information technologies on the organization of policing-intelligence and suggests that a number of «organizational pathologies» have arisen that make the functioning of security-intelligence processes in transnational policing deeply problematic. He argues that transnational police information circuits help to «compose the panic scenes of the security-control society».^[137] The paradoxical effect is that, the harder policing agencies work to produce security, the greater are feelings of insecurity.

Police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states is another form of transnational policing that has garnered attention. This form of transnational policing plays an increasingly important role in United Nations peacekeeping and this looks set to grow in the years ahead, especially as the international community seeks to develop the rule of law and reform security institutions in states recovering from conflict.^[138] With transnational police development-aid the imbalances of power between donors and recipients are stark and there are questions about the applicability and transportability of policing models between jurisdictions.^[139]

One topic concerns making transnational policing institutions democratically accountable.^[140] According to the Global Accountability Report for 2007, Interpol had the lowest scores in its category (IGOs), coming in tenth with a score of 22% on overall accountability capabilities.^[141]

Equipment

Weapons

In many jurisdictions, police officers carry firearms, primarily handguns, in the normal course of their duties. In the United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland), Iceland, Ireland, Norway, New Zealand,^[142] and Malta, with the exception of specialist units, officers do not carry firearms as a matter of course. Norwegian police carry firearms in their vehicles, but not on their duty belts, and must obtain authorization before the weapons can be removed from the vehicle.

Police often have specialized units for handling armed offenders or dangerous situations where combat is likely, such as police tactical units or authorised firearms officers. In some jurisdictions, depending on the circumstances, police can call on the military for assistance, as military aid to the civil power is an aspect of many armed forces. Perhaps the most high-profile example of this was in 1980, when the British Army’s Special Air Service was deployed to resolve the Iranian Embassy siege on behalf of the Metropolitan Police.

They can also be armed with «non-lethal» (more accurately known as «less than lethal» or «less-lethal» given that they can still be deadly^[143]) weaponry, particularly for riot control, or to inflict pain against a resistant suspect to force them to surrender without lethally wounding them. Non-lethal weapons include batons, tear gas, riot control agents, rubber bullets, riot shields, water cannons, and electroshock weapons. Police officers typically carry handcuffs to restrain suspects.

The use of firearms or deadly force is typically a last resort only to be used when necessary to save the lives of others or themselves, though some jurisdictions (such as Brazil) allow its use against fleeing felons and escaped convicts. Police officers in the United States are generally allowed to use deadly force if they believe their life is in danger, a policy that has been criticized for being vague.^[144] South African police have a «shoot-to-kill» policy, which allows officers to use deadly force against any person who poses a significant threat to them.^[145] With the country having one of the highest rates of violent crime, President Jacob Zuma stated that South Africa needs to handle crime differently from other countries.^[146]

Communications

Modern police forces make extensive use of two-way radio communications equipment, carried both on the person and installed in vehicles, to coordinate their work, share information, and get help quickly. Vehicle-installed mobile data terminals enhance the ability of police communications, enabling easier dispatching of calls, criminal background checks on persons of interest to be completed in a matter of seconds, and updating officers’ daily activity log and other required reports, on a real-time basis. Other common pieces of police equipment include flashlights, whistles, police notebooks, and «ticket books» or citations. Some police departments have developed advanced computerized data display and communication systems to bring real time data to officers, one example being the NYPD’s Domain Awareness System.

Vehicles

Police vehicles are used for detaining, patrolling, and transporting over wide areas that an officer could not effectively cover otherwise. The average police car used for standard patrol is a four-door sedan, SUV, or CUV, often modified by the manufacturer or police force’s fleet services to provide better performance to provide. Pickup trucks, off-road vehicles, and vans are often used in utility roles, though in some jurisdictions or situations (such as those where dirt roads are common, off-roading is required, or the nature of the officer’s assignment necessitates it), they may be used as standard patrol cars. Sports cars are typically not used by police due to cost and maintenance issues, though those that are used are typically only assigned to traffic enforcement or community policing, and are rarely, if ever, assigned to standard patrol or authorized to respond to dangerous calls (such as armed calls or pursuits) where the likelihood of the vehicle being damaged or destroyed is high.
Police vehicles are usually marked with appropriate symbols and equipped with sirens and flashing emergency lights to make others aware of police presence or response; in most jurisdictions, police vehicles with their sirens and emergency lights on have right of way in traffic, while in other jurisdictions, emergency lights may be kept on while patrolling to ensure ease of visibility. Unmarked or undercover police vehicles are used primarily for traffic enforcement or apprehending criminals without alerting them to their presence. The use of unmarked police vehicles for traffic enforcement is controversial, with the state of New York banning this practice in 1996 on the grounds that it endangered motorists who might be pulled over by police impersonators.^[147]

Motorcycles, having historically been a mainstay in police fleets, are commonly used, particularly in locations that a car may not be able to reach, to control potential public order situations involving meetings of motorcyclists, and often in police escorts where motorcycle police officers can quickly clear a path for escorted vehicles. Bicycle patrols are used in some areas, often downtown areas or parks, because they allow for wider and faster area coverage than officers on foot. Bicycles are also commonly used by riot police to create makeshift barricades against protesters.^[148]

Police aviation consists of helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft, while police watercraft tend to consist of RHIBs, motorboats, and patrol boats. SWAT vehicles are used by police tactical units, and often consist of four-wheeled armored personnel carriers used to transport tactical teams while providing armored cover, equipment storage space, or makeshift battering ram capabilities; these vehicles are typically not armed and do not patrol, and are only used to transport. Mobile command posts may also be used by some police forces to establish identifiable command centers at the scene of major situations.

Police cars may contain issued long guns, ammunition for issued weapons, less-lethal weaponry, riot control equipment, traffic cones, road flares, physical barricades or barricade tape, fire extinguishers,^[149] first aid kits, or defibrillators.^[150]

Strategies

The advent of the police car, two-way radio, and telephone in the early 20th century transformed policing into a reactive strategy that focused on responding to calls for service away from their beat.^[151] With this transformation, police command and control became more centralized.

In the United States, August Vollmer introduced other reforms, including education requirements for police officers.^[152] O.W. Wilson, a student of Vollmer, helped reduce corruption and introduce professionalism in Wichita, Kansas, and later in the Chicago Police Department.^[153] Strategies employed by O.W. Wilson included rotating officers from community to community to reduce their vulnerability to corruption, establishing of a non-partisan police board to help govern the police force, a strict merit system for promotions within the department, and an aggressive recruiting drive with higher police salaries to attract professionally qualified officers.^[154] During the professionalism era of policing, law enforcement agencies concentrated on dealing with felonies and other serious crime and conducting visible car patrols in between, rather than broader focus on crime prevention.^[155]

The Kansas City Preventive Patrol study in the early 1970s showed flaws in using visible car patrols for crime prevention. It found that aimless car patrols did little to deter crime and often went unnoticed by the public. Patrol officers in cars had insufficient contact and interaction with the community, leading to a social rift between the two.^[156] In the 1980s and 1990s, many law enforcement agencies began to adopt community policing strategies, and others adopted problem-oriented policing.

Broken windows’ policing was another, related approach introduced in the 1980s by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, who suggested that police should pay greater attention to minor «quality of life» offenses and disorderly conduct. The concept behind this method is simple: broken windows, graffiti, and other physical destruction or degradation of property create an environment in which crime and disorder is more likely. The presence of broken windows and graffiti sends a message that authorities do not care and are not trying to correct problems in these areas. Therefore, correcting these small problems prevents more serious criminal activity.^[157] The theory was popularised in the early 1990s by police chief William J. Bratton and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. It was emulated in 2010s in Kazakhstan through zero tolerance policing. Yet it failed to produce meaningful results in this country because citizens distrusted police while state leaders preferred police loyalty over police good behavior.^[158]

Building upon these earlier models, intelligence-led policing has also become an important strategy. Intelligence-led policing and problem-oriented policing are complementary strategies, both of which involve systematic use of information.^[159] Although it still lacks a universally accepted definition, the crux of intelligence-led policing is an emphasis on the collection and analysis of information to guide police operations, rather than the reverse.^[160]

A related development is evidence-based policing. In a similar vein to evidence-based policy, evidence-based policing is the use of controlled experiments to find which methods of policing are more effective. Leading advocates of evidence-based policing include the criminologist Lawrence W. Sherman and philanthropist Jerry Lee. Findings from controlled experiments include the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment,^[161] evidence that patrols deter crime if they are concentrated in crime hotspots^[162] and that restricting police powers to shoot suspects does not cause an increase in crime or violence against police officers.^[163] Use of experiments to assess the usefulness of strategies has been endorsed by many police services and institutions, including the U.S. Police Foundation and the UK College of Policing.

Power restrictions

In many nations, criminal procedure law has been developed to regulate officers’ discretion, so that they do not arbitrarily or unjustly exercise their powers of arrest, search and seizure, and use of force. In the United States, Miranda v. Arizona led to the widespread use of Miranda warnings or constitutional warnings.

In Miranda the court created safeguards against self-incriminating statements made after an arrest. The court held that «The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way, unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination»^[164]

Police in the United States are also prohibited from holding criminal suspects for more than a reasonable amount of time (usually 24–48 hours) before arraignment, using torture, abuse or physical threats to extract confessions, using excessive force to effect an arrest, and searching suspects’ bodies or their homes without a warrant obtained upon a showing of probable cause. The four exceptions to the constitutional requirement of a search warrant are:

• Consent
• Search incident to arrest
• Motor vehicle searches
• Exigent circumstances

In Terry v. Ohio (1968) the court divided seizure into two parts, the investigatory stop and arrest. The court further held that during an investigatory stop a police officer’s search » [is] confined to what [is] minimally necessary to determine whether [a suspect] is armed, and the intrusion, which [is] made for the sole purpose of protecting himself and others nearby, [is] confined to ascertaining the presence of weapons» (U.S. Supreme Court). Before Terry, every police encounter constituted an arrest, giving the police officer the full range of search authority. Search authority during a Terry stop (investigatory stop) is limited to weapons only.^[164]

Using deception for confessions is permitted, but not coercion. There are exceptions or exigent circumstances such as an articulated need to disarm a suspect or searching a suspect who has already been arrested (Search Incident to an Arrest). The Posse Comitatus Act severely restricts the use of the military for police activity, giving added importance to police SWAT units.

British police officers are governed by similar rules, such as those introduced to England and Wales under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), but generally have greater powers. They may, for example, legally search any suspect who has been arrested, or their vehicles, home or business premises, without a warrant, and may seize anything they find in a search as evidence.

All police officers in the United Kingdom, whatever their actual rank, are ‘constables’ in terms of their legal position. This means that a newly appointed constable has the same arrest powers as a Chief Constable or Commissioner. However, certain higher ranks have additional powers to authorize certain aspects of police operations, such as a power to authorize a search of a suspect’s house (section 18 PACE in England and Wales) by an officer of the rank of Inspector, or the power to authorize a suspect’s detention beyond 24 hours by a Superintendent.

Conduct, accountability and public confidence

Police services commonly include units for investigating crimes committed by the police themselves. These units are typically called internal affairs or inspectorate-general units. In some countries separate organizations outside the police exist for such purposes, such as the British Independent Office for Police Conduct. However, due to American laws around qualified immunity, it has become increasingly difficult to investigate and charge police misconduct and crimes.^[165]

Likewise, some state and local jurisdictions, for example, Springfield, Illinois^[166] have similar outside review organizations. The Police Service of Northern Ireland is investigated by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, an external agency set up as a result of the Patten report into policing the province. In the Republic of Ireland the Garda Síochána is investigated by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, an independent commission that replaced the Garda Complaints Board in May 2007.

The Special Investigations Unit of Ontario, Canada, is one of only a few civilian agencies around the world responsible for investigating circumstances involving police and others that have resulted in a death, serious injury, or allegations of sexual assault. The agency has made allegations of insufficient cooperation from various police services hindering their investigations.^[167]

In Hong Kong, any allegations of corruption within the police are investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Independent Police Complaints Council, two agencies which are independent of the police force.

In the United States, body cameras are often worn by police officers to record their interactions with the public and each other, providing audiovisual recorded evidence for review in the event an officer or agency’s actions are investigated.^[168]

Use of force

Police forces also find themselves under criticism for their use of force, particularly deadly force.^[169] Specifically, tension increases when a police officer of one ethnic group harms or kills a suspect of another one.^[170] In the United States, such events occasionally spark protests and accusations of racism against police and allegations that police departments practice racial profiling. Similar incidents have also happened in other countries.

In the United States since the 1960s, concern over such issues has increasingly weighed upon law enforcement agencies, courts and legislatures at every level of government. Incidents such as the 1965 Watts riots, the videotaped 1991 beating by LAPD officers of Rodney King, and the riot following their acquittal have been suggested by some people to be evidence that U.S. police are dangerously lacking in appropriate controls.

The fact that this trend has occurred contemporaneously with the rise of the civil rights movement, the «War on Drugs», and a precipitous rise in violent crime from the 1960s to the 1990s has made questions surrounding the role, administration and scope of police authority increasingly complicated.^[171]

Police departments and the local governments that oversee them in some jurisdictions have attempted to mitigate some of these issues through community outreach programs and community policing to make the police more accessible to the concerns of local communities, by working to increase hiring diversity, by updating training of police in their responsibilities to the community and under the law, and by increased oversight within the department or by civilian commissions.

In cases in which such measures have been lacking or absent, civil lawsuits have been brought by the United States Department of Justice against local law enforcement agencies, authorized under the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This has compelled local departments to make organizational changes, enter into consent decree settlements to adopt such measures, and submit to oversight by the Justice Department.^[172]

In May 2020, a global movement to increase scrutiny of police violence grew in popularity, starting in Minneapolis, Minnesota with the murder of George Floyd. Calls for defunding of the police and full abolition of the police gained larger support in the United States as more criticized systemic racism in policing.^[173]

Critics also argue that sometimes this abuse of force or power can extend to police officer civilian life as well. For example, critics note that women in around 40% of police officer families have experienced domestic violence^[174] and that police officers are convicted of misdemeanors and felonies at a rate of more than six times higher than concealed carry weapon permit holders.^[175]

Protection of individuals

The Supreme Court of the United States has consistently ruled that law enforcement officers in the U.S. have no duty to protect any individual, only to enforce the law in general. This is despite the motto of many police departments in the U.S. being a variation of «protect and serve»; regardless, many departments generally expect their officers to protect individuals. The first case to make such a ruling was South v. State of Maryland in 1855,^[176] and the most recent was Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales in 2005.^[177]

In contrast, the police are entitled to protect private rights in some jurisdictions. To ensure that the police would not interfere in the regular competencies of the courts of law, some police acts require that the police may only interfere in such cases where protection from courts cannot be obtained in time, and where, without interference of the police, the realization of the private right would be impeded.^[178] This would, for example, allow police to establish a restaurant guest’s identity and forward it to the innkeeper in a case where the guest cannot pay the bill at nighttime because his wallet had just been stolen from the restaurant table.

In addition, there are federal law enforcement agencies in the United States whose mission includes providing protection for executives such as the president and accompanying family members, visiting foreign dignitaries, and other high-ranking individuals.^{[179][better source needed]} Such agencies include the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Park Police.

See also

Lists

• List of basic law enforcement topics
• List of countries by size of police forces
• List of law enforcement agencies
• List of protective service agencies
• Police rank

References

Further reading

• Mitrani, Samuel (2014). The Rise of the Chicago Police Department: Class and Conflict, 1850–1894. University of Illinois Press, 272 pages.
  • Interview with Sam Mitrani: «The Function of Police in Modern Society: Peace or Control?» (January 2015), The Real News

External links

• United Nations Police Division

The answer probably depends on the region and culture in question, and when and how it became opened to the rest of the world.

For example, up until the early-mid 90s, the Hungarian Police didn’t use the word police on anywhere, only the Hungarian equivalent «Rendőrség». If you watch older footage and pictures of other nations’ police forces, you’d see the same too, especially for places that didn’t have lots of influence from the Anglosphere (and not many tourists).

EDIT: also it’s not universal at all. For example neither the German or Austrian Federal Police (Bundespolizei), nor the Polish national Police (Policja) or the Romanian national police (Politia), or the Finnish national police (Poliisi or Polisen for Swedes) use the English word on their uniforms, coat of arms, or vehicles.As you see, the only common thing in these forces’ name, is all of them derived from French word police, which came from the old Latin politia.

Example:
Hungarian police car from the 1970s-80s: (source).

Two other paintjob/setup: source

For the color of lights it’s a very different question, that probably got standardized probably very early, and as far I and the Hungarian law concerned, there isn’t a dedicated light color for police. They use the same siren (siren sound can be different among the services, but that’s also irrelevant to the legality) and flashing blue lights setup as every other emergency services and state VIP transport services use. The red light is still optional, and not legal without a blue light.

Uniforms similarity come out of the same necessity of form follows function, as the uniform identifies the wearer to the general public, as the member of the law enforcement and tailored for their needs too.

Which might involve the need to not look too similar to the military, which a lot of older uniforms do. Like these Hungarian Police uniforms from 1961:

which would look very similar to the Hungarian People’s Army uniforms of the era, or even the Soviet military uniforms which «inspired» both. This design for example have been kept more or less similar until they started to replace them in 2002 with a different attire. (Current uniforms here and here)

This article is about law enforcement organizations. For officers of such organizations, see Police officer. For the British rock band, see The Police. For the town, see Police, Poland. For other uses, see Police (disambiguation).

«Department of Police» redirects here. For other uses, see Department of Police (disambiguation).

«City Police» redirects here. For the 1993 Indian film, see City Police (film).

File:HH Polizeihauptmeister MZ.jpg

A police force is a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder.^[1] Their powers include the legitimized use of force. The term is most commonly associated with police services of a sovereign state that are authorized to exercise the police power of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility. Police forces are often defined as being separate from military or other organizations involved in the defense of the state against foreign aggressors; however, gendarmerie are military units charged with civil policing.

Law enforcement, however, constitutes only part of policing activity.^[2] Policing has included an array of activities in different situations, but the predominant ones are concerned with the preservation of order.^[3] In some societies, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, these developed within the context of maintaining the class system and the protection of private property.^[4] Many police forces suffer from police corruption to a greater or lesser degree. The police force is usually a public sector service, meaning they are paid through taxes.

Alternative names for police force include constabulary, gendarmerie, police department, police service, crime prevention, protective services, law enforcement agency, civil guard or civic guard. Members may be referred to as police officers, troopers, sheriffs, constables, rangers, peace officers or civic/civil guards.

As police are often interacting with individuals, slang terms are numerous. Many slang terms for police officers are decades or centuries old with lost etymology. One of the oldest, «cop,» has largely lost its slang connotations and become a common colloquial term used both by the public and police officers to refer to their profession.^[5]

Etymology

First attested in English in the early 15th century, initially in a range of senses encompassing ‘(public) policy; state; public order’, the word police comes from Middle French police (‘public order, administration, government’),^[6] in turn from Latin politia,^[7] which is the Latinisation of the Greek πολιτεία (politeia), «citizenship, administration, civil polity».^[8] This is derived from πόλις (polis), «city».^[9]

History

Main article: History of criminal justice

Ancient policing

Law enforcement in ancient China was carried out by «prefects» for thousands of years since it developed in both the Chu and Jin kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn period. In Jin, dozens of prefects were spread across the state, each having limited authority and employment period. They were appointed by local magistrates, who reported to higher authorities such as governors, who in turn were appointed by the emperor, and they oversaw the civil administration of their «prefecture», or jurisdiction. Under each prefect were «subprefects» who helped collectively with law enforcement in the area. Some prefects were responsible for handling investigations, much like modern police detectives. Prefects could also be women.^[10] The concept of the «prefecture system» spread to other cultures such as Korea and Japan.

In ancient Greece, publicly owned slaves were used by magistrates as police. In Athens, a group of 300 Scythian slaves (the ῥαβδοῦχοι, «rod-bearers») was used to guard public meetings to keep order and for crowd control, and also assisted with dealing with criminals, handling prisoners, and making arrests. Other duties associated with modern policing, such as investigating crimes, were left to the citizens themselves.^[11]

In the Roman empire, the army, rather than a dedicated police organization, provided security. Local watchmen were hired by cities to provide some extra security. Magistrates such as procurators fiscal and quaestors investigated crimes. There was no concept of public prosecution, so victims of crime or their families had to organize and manage the prosecution themselves.

Under the reign of Augustus, when the capital had grown to almost one million inhabitants, 14 wards were created; the wards were protected by seven squads of 1,000 men called «vigiles«, who acted as firemen and nightwatchmen. Their duties included apprehending thieves and robbers and capturing runaway slaves. The vigiles were supported by the Urban Cohorts who acted as a heavy-duty anti-riot force and even the Praetorian Guard if necessary.

Medieval policing

File:Jakobsweg — Pilger 1568 — Hurden IMG 5664.JPG

In medieval Spain, Santa Hermandades, or «holy brotherhoods», peacekeeping associations of armed individuals, were a characteristic of municipal life, especially in Castile. As medieval Spanish kings often could not offer adequate protection, protective municipal leagues began to emerge in the twelfth century against banditry and other rural criminals, and against the lawless nobility or to support one or another claimant to a crown.

These organizations were intended to be temporary, but became a long-standing fixture of Spain. The first recorded case of the formation of an hermandad occurred when the towns and the peasantry of the north united to police the pilgrim road to Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, and protect the pilgrims against robber knights.

Throughout the Middle Ages such alliances were frequently formed by combinations of towns to protect the roads connecting them, and were occasionally extended to political purposes. Among the most powerful was the league of North Castilian and Basque ports, the Hermandad de las marismas: Toledo, Talavera, and Villarreal.

As one of their first acts after end of the War of the Castilian Succession in 1479, Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile established the centrally-organized and efficient Holy Brotherhood as a national police force. They adapted an existing brotherhood to the purpose of a general police acting under officials appointed by themselves, and endowed with great powers of summary jurisdiction even in capital cases. The original brotherhoods continued to serve as modest local police-units until their final suppression in 1835.

The Vehmic courts of Germany provided some policing in the absence of strong state institutions.

In France during the Middle Ages, there were two Great Officers of the Crown of France with police responsibilities: The Marshal of France and the Constable of France. The military policing responsibilities of the Marshal of France were delegated to the Marshal’s provost, whose force was known as the Marshalcy because its authority ultimately derived from the Marshal. The marshalcy dates back to the Hundred Years’ War, and some historians trace it back to the early 12th century. Another organisation, the Constabulary (French: Connétablie), was under the command of the Constable of France. The constabulary was regularised as a military body in 1337. Under Francis I of France (who reigned 1515–1547), the Maréchaussée was merged with the Constabulary. The resulting force was also known as the Maréchaussée, or, formally, the Constabulary and Marshalcy of France.

The English system of maintaining public order since the Norman conquest was a private system of tithings, led by a constable, which was based on a social obligation for the good conduct of the others; more common was that local lords and nobles were responsible for maintaining order in their lands, and often appointed a constable, sometimes unpaid, to enforce the law. There was also a system investigative «juries«.

The Assize of Arms of 1252, which required the appointment of constables to summon men to arms, quell breaches of the peace, and to deliver offenders to the sheriffs or reeves, is cited as one of the earliest creation of the English police.^[12] The Statute of Winchester of 1285 is also cited as the primary legislation regulating the policing of the country between the Norman Conquest and the Metropolitan Police Act 1829.^[12][13]

From about 1500, private watchmen were funded by private individuals and organisations to carry out police functions. They were later nicknamed ‘Charlies’, probably after the reigning monarch King Charles II. Thief-takers were also rewarded for catching thieves and returning the stolen property.

The first use of the word police («Polles») in English comes from the book «The Second Part of the Institutes of the Lawes of England» published in 1642.^[14]

Early modern policing

The first centrally organised police force was created by the government of King Louis XIV in 1667 to police the city of Paris, then the largest city in Europe. The royal edict, registered by the Parlement of Paris on March 15, 1667 created the office of lieutenant général de police («lieutenant general of police»), who was to be the head of the new Paris police force, and defined the task of the police as «ensuring the peace and quiet of the public and of private individuals, purging the city of what may cause disturbances, procuring abundance, and having each and everyone live according to their station and their duties».

File:Gabriel-Nicolas de la Reynie.jpg

This office was first held by Gabriel Nicolas de la Reynie, who had 44 commissaires de police (police commissioners) under his authority. In 1709, these commissioners were assisted by inspecteurs de police (police inspectors). The city of Paris was divided into 16 districts policed by the commissaires, each assigned to a particular district and assisted by a growing bureaucracy. The scheme of the Paris police force was extended to the rest of France by a royal edict of October 1699, resulting in the creation of lieutenants general of police in all large French cities and towns.

After the French Revolution, Napoléon I reorganized the police in Paris and other cities with more than 5,000 inhabitants on February 17, 1800 as the Prefecture of Police. On March 12, 1829, a government decree created the first uniformed police in France, known as sergents de ville («city sergeants»), which the Paris Prefecture of Police’s website claims were the first uniformed policemen in the world.^[15]

In 1737, George II began paying some London and Middlesex watchmen with tax monies, beginning the shift to government control. In 1749 Henry Fielding began organizing a force of quasi-professional constables known as the Bow Street Runners. The Macdaniel affair added further impetus for a publicly salaried police force that did not depend on rewards. Nonetheless, In 1828, there were privately financed police units in no fewer than 45 parishes within a 10-mile radius of London.

The word «police» was borrowed from French into the English language in the 18th century, but for a long time it applied only to French and continental European police forces. The word, and the concept of police itself, were «disliked as a symbol of foreign oppression» (according to Britannica 1911). Before the 19th century, the first use of the word «police» recorded in government documents in the United Kingdom was the appointment of Commissioners of Police for Scotland in 1714 and the creation of the Marine Police in 1798.

Policing in London

File:Patrick Colquhoun.jpg

In 1797, Patrick Colquhoun was able to persuade the West Indies merchants who operated at the Pool of London on the River Thames, to establish a police force at the docks to prevent rampant theft that was causing annual estimated losses of £500,000 worth of cargo.^[16] The idea of a police, as it then existed in France, was considered as a potentially undesirable foreign import. In building the case for the police in the face of England’s firm anti-police sentiment, Colquhoun framed the political rationale on economic indicators to show that a police dedicated to crime prevention was «perfectly congenial to the principle of the British constitution.» Moreover, he went so far as to praise the French system, which had reached «the greatest degree of perfection» in his estimation.^[17]

File:No Police!! Well Done Aberystwyth Boys 1850.jpg

With the initial investment of £4,200, the new trial force of the Thames River Police began with about 50 men charged with policing 33,000 workers in the river trades, of whom Colquhoun claimed 11,000 were known criminals and «on the game.» The force was a success after its first year, and his men had «established their worth by saving £122,000 worth of cargo and by the rescuing of several lives.» Word of this success spread quickly, and the government passed the Marine Police Bill on 28 July 1800, transforming it from a private to public police agency; now the oldest police force in the world. Colquhoun published a book on the experiment, The Commerce and Policing of the River Thames. It found receptive audiences far outside London, and inspired similar forces in other cities, notably, New York City, Dublin, and Sydney.^[16]

Colquhoun’s utilitarian approach to the problem – using a cost-benefit argument to obtain support from businesses standing to benefit – allowed him to achieve what Henry and John Fielding failed for their Bow Street detectives. Unlike the stipendiary system at Bow Street, the river police were full-time, salaried officers prohibited from taking private fees.^[18] His other contribution was the concept of preventive policing; his police were to act as a highly visible deterrent to crime by their permanent presence on the Thames.^[17] Colquhoun’s innovations were a critical development leading up to Robert Peel‘s «new» police three decades later.^[19]

Meanwhile, the authorities in Glasgow, Scotland successfully petitioned the government to pass the Glasgow Police Act establishing the City of Glasgow Police in 1800. Other Scottish towns soon followed suit and set up their own police forces through acts of parliament.^[20] In Ireland, the Irish Constabulary Act of 1822 marked the beginning of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The Act established a force in each barony with chief constables and inspectors general under the control of the civil administration at Dublin Castle. By 1841 this force numbered over 8,600 men.

Metropolitan police force

File:Peeler1.jpg

London was fast reaching a size unprecedented in world history, due to the onset of the Industrial Revolution.^[21] It became clear that the locally maintained system of volunteer constables and «watchmen» was ineffective, both in detecting and preventing crime. A parliamentary committee was appointed to investigate the system of policing in London. Upon Sir Robert Peel being appointed as Home Secretary in 1822, he established a second and more effective committee, and acted upon its findings.

Royal assent to the Metropolitan Police Act 1829 was given^[22] and the Metropolitan Police Service was established on September 29, 1829 in London as the first modern and professional police force in the world.^[23][24][25]

Peel, widely regarded as the father of modern policing,^[26] was heavily influenced by the social and legal philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, who called for a strong and centralized, but politically neutral, police force for the maintenance of social order, for the protection of people from crime and to act as a visible deterrent to urban crime and disorder.^[27] Peel decided to standardise the police force as an official paid profession, to organise it in a civilian fashion, and to make it answerable to the public.^[28]

File:Christian Krogh-Albertine i politilægens venteværelse.jpg

Due to public fears concerning the deployment of the military in domestic matters, Peel organised the force along civilian lines, rather than paramilitary. To appear neutral, the uniform was deliberately manufactured in blue, rather than red which was then a military colour, along with the officers being armed only with a wooden truncheon and a rattle to signal the need for assistance. Along with this, police ranks did not include military titles, with the exception of Sergeant.^[29]

To distance the new police force from the initial public view of it as a new tool of government repression, Peel publicised the so-called Peelian principles, which set down basic guidelines for ethical policing:

• Every police officer should be issued an warrant card with a unique identification number to assure accountability for his actions.
• Whether the police are effective is not measured on the number of arrests but on the lack of crime.
• Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. Hence, Peel’s most often quoted principle that «The police are the public and the public are the police.»

File:Police group portrait Bury St Edmunds Suffolk England.jpg

The 1829 Metropolitan Police Act created a modern police force by limiting the purview of the force and its powers, and envisioning it as merely an organ of the judicial system. Their job was apolitical; to maintain the peace and apprehend criminals for the courts to process according to the law.^[30] This was very different to the «continental model» of the police force that had been developed in France, where the police force worked within the parameters of the absolutist state as an extension of the authority of the monarch and functioned as part of the governing state.

In 1863, the Metropolitan Police were issued with the distinctive custodian helmet, and in 1884 they switched to the use of whistles that could be heard from much further away.^[31] The Metropolitan Police became a model for the police forces in most countries, such as the United States, and most of the British Empire. Bobbies can still be found in many parts of the Commonwealth of Nations.^[32]

Other countries

Australia

Main article: Law enforcement in Australia

File:Victorian Police Motorcycle, Geelong, Aust, jjron, 30.9.2010.jpg

In Australia the first police force having centralised command as well as jurisdiction over an entire colony was the South Australia Police, formed in 1838 under Henry Inman.

However, whilst the New South Wales Police Force was established in 1862, it was made up from a large number of policing and military units operating within the then Colony of New South Wales and traces its links back to the Royal Marines. The passing of the Police Regulation Act of 1862 essentially tightly regulated and centralised all of the police forces operating throughout the Colony of New South Wales.

The New South Wales Police Force remains the largest police force in Australia in terms of personnel and physical resources. It is also the only police force that requires its recruits to undertake university studies at the recruit level and has the recruit pay for their own education.

Brazil

Main article: Law enforcement in Brazil

File:Fnst.jpg

In 1566, the first police investigator of Rio de Janeiro was recruited. By the 17th century, most captaincies already had local units with law enforcement functions. On July 9, 1775 a Cavalry Regiment was created in the state of Minas Gerais for maintaining law and order. In 1808, the Portuguese royal family relocated to Brazil, because of the French invasion of Portugal. King João VI established the «Intendência Geral de Polícia» (General Police Intendancy) for investigations. He also created a Royal Police Guard for Rio de Janeiro in 1809. In 1831, after independence, each province started organizing its local «military police«, with order maintenance tasks. The Federal Railroad Police was created in 1852, Federal Highway Police, was established in 1928, and Federal Police in 1967.

Canada

Main article: Law enforcement in Canada

In Canada, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary was founded in 1729, making it the first police force in present-day Canada. It was followed in 1834 by the Toronto Police, and in 1838 by police forces in Montreal and Quebec City. A national force, the Dominion Police, was founded in 1868. Initially the Dominion Police provided security for parliament, but its responsibilities quickly grew. The famous Royal Northwest Mounted Police was founded in 1873.
The merger of these two police forces in 1920 formed the world-famous Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Lebanon

In Lebanon, modern police were established in 1861, with creation of the Gendarmerie.^[33]

India

File:Gcp patrol car.jpg

In India, the police is under the control of respective States and union territories and is known to be under State Police Services (SPS). The candidates selected for the SPS are usually posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police or Assistant Commissioner of Police once their probationary period ends. On prescribed satisfactory service in the SPS, the officers are nominated to the Indian Police Service.^[34] The service color is usually dark blue and red, while the uniform color is Khaki.^[35]

United States

Main article: Law enforcement in the United States

In British North America, policing was initially provided by local elected officials. For instance, the New York Sheriff’s Office was founded in 1626, and the Albany County Sheriff’s Department in the 1660s. In the colonial period, policing was provided by elected sheriffs and local militias.

In 1789 the U.S. Marshals Service was established, followed by other federal services such as the U.S. Parks Police (1791)^[36] and U.S. Mint Police (1792).^[37] The first city police services were established in Philadelphia in 1751,^[38] Richmond, Virginia in 1807,^[39] Boston in 1838,^[40] and New York in 1845.^[41] The U.S. Secret Service was founded in 1865 and was for some time the main investigative body for the federal government.^[42]

File:U.S. Marshals knock and announce.jpg

In the American Old West, policing was often of very poor quality.^{[citation needed]} The Army often provided some policing alongside poorly resourced sheriffs and temporarily organized posses.^{[citation needed]} Public organizations were supplemented by private contractors, notably the Pinkerton National Detective Agency, which was hired by individuals, businessmen, local governments and the federal government. At its height, the Pinkerton Agency’s numbers exceeded those of the United States Army.^{[citation needed]}

In recent years, in addition to federal, state, and local forces, some special districts have been formed to provide extra police protection in designated areas. These districts may be known as neighborhood improvement districts, crime prevention districts, or security districts.^[43]

In 2005, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that police do not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm.^[44]

Development of theory

Michel Foucault claims that the contemporary concept of police as a paid and funded functionary of the state was developed by German and French legal scholars and practitioners in Public administration and Statistics in the 17th and early 18th centuries, most notably with Nicolas Delamare’s Traité de la Police («Treatise on the Police»), first published in 1705. The German Polizeiwissenschaft (Science of Police) first theorized by Philipp von Hörnigk a 17th-century Austrian Political economist and civil servant and much more famously by Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi who produced an important theoretical work known as Cameral science on the formulation of police.^[45] Foucault cites Magdalene Humpert author of Bibliographie der Kameralwissenschaften (1937) in which the author makes note of a substantial bibliography was produced of over 4000 pieces of the practice of Polizeiwissenschaft however, this maybe a mistranslation of Foucault’s own work the actual source of Magdalene Humpert states over 14,000 items were produced from the 16th century dates ranging from 1520-1850.^[46][47]

As conceptualized by the Polizeiwissenschaft,according to Foucault the police had an administrative,economic and social duty («procuring abundance»). It was in charge of demographic concerns and needed to be incorporated within the western political philosophy system of raison d’état and therefore giving the superficial appearance of empowering the population (and unwittingly supervising the population), which, according to mercantilist theory, was to be the main strength of the state. Thus, its functions largely overreached simple law enforcement activities and included public health concerns, urban planning (which was important because of the miasma theory of disease; thus, cemeteries were moved out of town, etc.), and surveillance of prices.^[48]

File:Jeremy Bentham by Henry William Pickersgill detail.jpg

The concept of preventive policing, or policing to deter crime from taking place, gained influence in the late 18th century. Police Magistrate John Fielding, head of the Bow Street Runners, argued that «…it is much better to prevent even one man from being a rogue than apprehending and bringing forty to justice.»^[49]

The Utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, promoted the views of Italian Marquis Cesare Beccaria, and disseminated a translated version of «Essay on Crime in Punishment». Bentham espoused the guiding principle of «the greatest good for the greatest number:

It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them. This is the chief aim of every good system of legislation, which is the art of leading men to the greatest possible happiness or to the least possible misery, according to calculation of all the goods and evils of life.^[49]

Patrick Colquhoun‘s influential work, A Treatise on the Police of the Metropolis (1797) was heavily influenced by Benthamite thought. Colquhoun’s Thames River Police was founded on these principles, and in contrast to the Bow Street Runners, acted as a deterrent by their continual presence on the riverfront, in addition to being able to intervene if they spotted a crime in progress.^[50]

Edwin Chadwick‘s 1829 article, «Preventive police» in the London Review,^[51] argued that prevention ought to be the primary concern of a police body, which was not the case in practice. The reason, argued Chadwick, was that «A preventive police would act more immediately by placing difficulties in obtaining the objects of temptation.» In contrast to a deterrent of punishment, a preventive police force would deter criminality by making crime cost-ineffective — «crime doesn’t pay». In the second draft of his 1829 Police Act, the «object» of the new Metropolitan Police, was changed by Robert Peel to the «principal object,» which was the «prevention of crime.»^[52] Later historians would attribute the perception of England’s «appearance of orderliness and love of public order» to the preventive principle entrenched in Peel’s police system.^[53]

Development of modern police forces around the world was contemporary to the formation of the state, later defined by sociologist Max Weber as achieving a «monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force» and which was primarily exercised by the police and the military. Marxist theory situates the development of the modern state as part of the rise of capitalism, in which the police are one component of the bourgeoisie‘s repressive apparatus for subjugating the working class.

Personnel and organization

Police forces include both preventive (uniformed) police and detectives. Terminology varies from country to country. Police functions include protecting life and property, enforcing criminal law, criminal investigations, regulating traffic, crowd control, and other public safety duties.

Uniformed police

File:Brazilian Federal Highway Police.jpg

Preventive Police, also called Uniform Branch, Uniformed Police, Uniform Division, Administrative Police, Order Police, or Patrol, designates the police that patrol and respond to emergencies and other incidents, as opposed to detective services. As the name «uniformed» suggests, they wear uniforms and perform functions that require an immediate recognition of an officer’s legal authority, such as traffic control, stopping and detaining motorists, and more active crime response and prevention.

Preventive police almost always make up the bulk of a police service’s personnel. In Australia and Britain, patrol personnel are also known as «general duties» officers.^[54] Atypically, Brazil’s preventive police are known as Military Police.^[55]

Detectives

File:Vehicle drug search australia.jpg

Police detectives are responsible for investigations and detective work. Detectives may be called Investigations Police, Judiciary/Judicial Police, and Criminal Police. In the UK, they are often referred to by the name of their department, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). Detectives typically make up roughly 15%-25% of a police service’s personnel.

Detectives, in contrast to uniformed police, typically wear ‘business attire’ in bureaucratic and investigative functions where a uniformed presence would be either a distraction or intimidating, but a need to establish police authority still exists. «Plainclothes» officers dress in attire consistent with that worn by the general public for purposes of blending in.

In some cases, police are assigned to work «undercover«, where they conceal their police identity to investigate crimes, such as organized crime or narcotics crime, that are unsolvable by other means. In some cases this type of policing shares aspects with espionage.

Despite popular conceptions promoted by movies and television, many US police departments prefer not to maintain officers in non-patrol bureaus and divisions beyond a certain period of time, such as in the detective bureau, and instead maintain policies that limit service in such divisions to a specified period of time, after which officers must transfer out or return to patrol duties.^{[citation needed]} This is done in part based upon the perception that the most important and essential police work is accomplished on patrol in which officers become acquainted with their beats, prevent crime by their presence, respond to crimes in progress, manage crises, and practice their skills.^{[citation needed]}

Detectives, by contrast, usually investigate crimes after they have occurred and after patrol officers have responded first to a situation. Investigations often take weeks or months to complete, during which time detectives spend much of their time away from the streets, in interviews and courtrooms, for example. Rotating officers also promotes cross-training in a wider variety of skills, and serves to prevent «cliques» that can contribute to corruption or other unethical behavior.

Auxiliary

Police may also take on auxiliary administrative duties, such as issuing firearms licenses. The extent that police have these functions varies among countries, with police in France, Germany, and other continental European countries handling such tasks to a greater extent than British counterparts.^[54]

Specialized units

File:Rakshak.JPG

Specialized preventive and detective groups, or Specialist Investigation Departments exist within many law enforcement organizations either for dealing with particular types of crime, such as traffic law enforcement and crash investigation, homicide, or fraud; or for situations requiring specialized skills, such as underwater search, aviation, explosive device disposal («bomb squad«), and computer crime.

Most larger jurisdictions also employ specially selected and trained quasi-military units armed with military-grade weapons for the purposes of dealing with particularly violent situations beyond the capability of a patrol officer response, including high-risk warrant service and barricaded suspects. In the United States these units go by a variety of names, but are commonly known as SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) teams.

In counterinsurgency-type campaigns, select and specially trained units of police armed and equipped as light infantry have been designated as police field forces who perform paramilitary-type patrols and ambushes whilst retaining their police powers in areas that were highly dangerous.^[56]

Because their situational mandate typically focuses on removing innocent bystanders from dangerous people and dangerous situations, not violent resolution, they are often equipped with non-lethal tactical tools like chemical agents, «flashbang» and concussion grenades, and rubber bullets. The London Metropolitan police’s Specialist Firearms Command (CO19)^[57] is a group of armed police used in dangerous situations including hostage taking, armed robbery/assault and terrorism.

Military police

Military police may refer to:

• a section of the military solely responsible for policing the armed forces (referred to as provosts)
• a section of the military responsible for policing in both the armed forces and in the civilian population (most gendarmeries, such as the French Gendarmerie, the Italian Carabinieri, the Spanish Guardia Civil and the Portuguese Republican National Guard also known as GNR)
• a section of the military solely responsible for policing the civilian population (such as the Romanian Gendarmerie)
• the civilian preventive police of a Brazilian state (Policia Militar)
• a Special Military law enforcement Service, like the Russian Military Police

Religious police

File:Taliban beating woman in public RAWA.jpg

Some Islamic societies have religious police, who enforce the application of Islamic Sharia law. Their authority may include the power to arrest unrelated men and women caught socializing, anyone engaged in homosexual behavior or prostitution; to enforce Islamic dress codes, and store closures during Islamic prayer time.^[58][59]

They enforce Muslim dietary laws, prohibit the consumption or sale of alcoholic beverages and pork, and seize banned consumer products and media regarded as un-Islamic, such as CDs/DVDs of various Western musical groups, television shows and film.^[58][59] In Saudi Arabia, the Mutaween actively prevent the practice or proselytizing of non-Islamic religions within Saudi Arabia, where they are banned.^[58][59]

Varying jurisdictions

Police forces are usually organized and funded by some level of government. The level of government responsible for policing varies from place to place, and may be at the national, regional or local level. In some places there may be multiple police forces operating in the same area, with different ones having jurisdiction according to the type of crime or other circumstances.

For example, in the UK, policing is primarily the responsibility of a regional police force; however specialist units exist at the national level. In the US, there is typically a state police force, but crimes are usually handled by local police forces that usually only cover a few municipalities. National agencies, such as the FBI, only have jurisdiction over federal crimes or those with an interstate component.

In addition to conventional urban or regional police forces, there are other police forces with specialized functions or jurisdiction. In the United States, the federal government has a number of police forces with their own specialized jurisdictions.

Some examples are the Federal Protective Service, which patrols and protects government buildings; the postal police, which protect postal buildings, vehicles and items; the Park Police, which protect national parks, or Amtrak Police which patrol Amtrak stations and trains.

There are also some government agencies that perform police functions in addition to other duties. The U.S. Coast Guard carries out many police functions for boaters.

In major cities, there may be a separate police agency for public transit systems, such as the New York City Port Authority Police or the MTA police, or for major government functions, such as sanitation, or environmental functions.

File:RUC PSNI Dungiven.JPG

International policing

The terms international policing, transnational policing, and/or global policing began to be used from the early 1990s onwards to describe forms of policing that transcended the boundaries of the sovereign nation-state (Nadelmann, 1993),^[60] (Sheptycki, 1995).^[61] These terms refer in variable ways to practices and forms for policing that, in some sense, transcend national borders. This includes a variety of practices, but international police cooperation, criminal intelligence exchange between police agencies working in different nation-states, and police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states are the three types that have received the most scholarly attention.

Historical studies reveal that policing agents have undertaken a variety of cross-border police missions for many years (Deflem, 2002).^[62] For example, in the 19th century a number of European policing agencies undertook cross-border surveillance because of concerns about anarchist agitators and other political radicals. A notable example of this was the occasional surveillance by Prussian police of Karl Marx during the years he remained resident in London. The interests of public police agencies in cross-border co-operation in the control of political radicalism and ordinary law crime were primarily initiated in Europe, which eventually led to the establishment of Interpol before the Second World War. There are also many interesting examples of cross-border policing under private auspices and by municipal police forces that date back to the 19th century (Nadelmann, 1993).^[60] It has been established that modern policing has transgressed national boundaries from time to time almost from its inception. It is also generally agreed that in the post–Cold War era this type of practice became more significant and frequent (Sheptycki, 2000).^[63]

Not a lot of empirical work on the practices of inter/transnational information and intelligence sharing has been undertaken. A notable exception is James Sheptycki‘s study of police cooperation in the English Channel region (2002),^[64] which provides a systematic content analysis of information exchange files and a description of how these transnational information and intelligence exchanges are transformed into police case-work. The study showed that transnational police information sharing was routinized in the cross-Channel region from 1968 on the basis of agreements directly between the police agencies and without any formal agreement between the countries concerned. By 1992, with the signing of the Schengen Treaty, which formalized aspects of police information exchange across the territory of the European Union, there were worries that much, if not all, of this intelligence sharing was opaque, raising questions about the efficacy of the accountability mechanisms governing police information sharing in Europe (Joubert and Bevers, 1996).^[65]

Studies of this kind outside of Europe are even rarer, so it is difficult to make generalizations, but one small-scale study that compared transnational police information and intelligence sharing practices at specific cross-border locations in North America and Europe confirmed that low visibility of police information and intelligence sharing was a common feature (Alain, 2001).^[66] Intelligence-led policing is now common practice in most advanced countries (Ratcliffe, 2007)^[67] and it is likely that police intelligence sharing and information exchange has a common morphology around the world (Ratcliffe, 2007).^[67] James Sheptycki has analyzed the effects of the new information technologies on the organization of policing-intelligence and suggests that a number of ‘organizational pathologies’ have arisen that make the functioning of security-intelligence processes in transnational policing deeply problematic. He argues that transnational police information circuits help to «compose the panic scenes of the security-control society».^[68] The paradoxical effect is that, the harder policing agencies work to produce security, the greater are feelings of insecurity.

Police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states is another form of transnational policing that has garnered attention. This form of transnational policing plays an increasingly important role in United Nations peacekeeping and this looks set to grow in the years ahead, especially as the international community seeks to develop the rule of law and reform security institutions in States recovering from conflict (Goldsmith and Sheptycki, 2007)^[69] With transnational police development-aid the imbalances of power between donors and recipients are stark and there are questions about the applicability and transportability of policing models between jurisdictions (Hills, 2009).^[70]

Perhaps the greatest question regarding the future development of transnational policing is: in whose interest is it? At a more practical level, the question translates into one about how to make transnational policing institutions democratically accountable (Sheptycki, 2004).^[71] For example, according to the Global Accountability Report for 2007 (Lloyd, et al. 2007) Interpol had the lowest scores in its category (IGOs), coming in tenth with a score of 22% on overall accountability capabilities (p. 19).^[72] As this report points out, and the existing academic literature on transnational policing seems to confirm, this is a secretive area and one not open to civil society involvement.

Equipment

Weapons

File:Blindado-CORE.JPG

In many jurisdictions, police officers carry firearms, primarily handguns, in the normal course of their duties. In the United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland), Iceland, Ireland, Norway, New Zealand,^[73] and Malta, with the exception of specialist units, officers do not carry firearms as a matter of course.

Police often have specialist units for handling armed offenders, and similar dangerous situations, and can (depending on local laws), in some extreme circumstances, call on the military (since Military Aid to the Civil Power is a role of many armed forces). Perhaps the most high-profile example of this was, in 1980 the Metropolitan Police handing control of the Iranian Embassy Siege to the Special Air Service.

They can also be armed with non-lethal (more accurately known as «less than lethal» or «less-lethal») weaponry, particularly for riot control. Non-lethal weapons include batons, tear gas, riot control agents, rubber bullets, riot shields, water cannons and electroshock weapons. Police officers often carry handcuffs to restrain suspects. The use of firearms or deadly force is typically a last resort only to be used when necessary to save human life, although some jurisdictions (such as Brazil) allow its use against fleeing felons and escaped convicts. A «shoot-to-kill» policy was recently introduced in South Africa, which allows police to use deadly force against any person who poses a significant threat to them or civilians.^[74] With the country having one of the highest rates of violent crime, president Jacob Zuma states that South Africa needs to handle crime differently from other countries.^[75]

Communications

Modern police forces make extensive use of radio communications equipment, carried both on the person and installed in vehicles, to co-ordinate their work, share information, and get help quickly. In recent years, vehicle-installed computers have enhanced the ability of police communications, enabling easier dispatching of calls, criminal background checks on persons of interest to be completed in a matter of seconds, and updating officers’ daily activity log and other, required reports on a real-time basis. Other common pieces of police equipment include flashlights/torches, whistles, police notebooks and «ticket books» or citations.

Vehicles

Main article: Police transport

File:Boston Police cruiser on Beacon Street.jpg

File:Politiepolizei2.JPG

Police vehicles are used for detaining, patrolling and transporting. The average police patrol vehicle is a specially modified, four door sedan (saloon in British English). Police vehicles are usually marked with appropriate logos and are equipped with sirens and flashing light bars to aid in making others aware of police presence.

Unmarked vehicles are used primarily for sting operations or apprehending criminals without alerting them to their presence. Some police forces use unmarked or minimally marked cars for traffic law enforcement, since drivers slow down at the sight of marked police vehicles and unmarked vehicles make it easier for officers to catch speeders and traffic violators. This practice is controversial, with for example, New York State banning this practice in 1996 on the grounds that it endangered motorists who might be pulled over by people impersonating police officers.^[76]

Motorcycles are also commonly used, particularly in locations that a car may not be able to reach, to control potential public order situations involving meetings of motorcyclists and often in escort duties where motorcycle police officers can quickly clear a path for escorted vehicles. Bicycle patrols are used in some areas because they allow for more open interaction with the public. In addition, their quieter operation can facilitate approaching suspects unawares and can help in pursuing them attempting to escape on foot.

Police forces use an array of specialty vehicles such as helicopters, airplanes, watercraft, mobile command posts, vans, trucks, all-terrain vehicles, motorcycles, and armored vehicles.

Other safety equipment

Police cars may also contain fire extinguishers^[77][78] or defibrillators.^[79]

Strategies

The advent of the police car, two-way radio, and telephone in the early 20th century transformed policing into a reactive strategy that focused on responding to calls for service.^[80] With this transformation, police command and control became more centralized.

In the United States, August Vollmer introduced other reforms, including education requirements for police officers.^[81] O.W. Wilson, a student of Vollmer, helped reduce corruption and introduce professionalism in Wichita, Kansas, and later in the Chicago Police Department.^[82] Strategies employed by O.W. Wilson included rotating officers from community to community to reduce their vulnerability to corruption, establishing of a non-partisan police board to help govern the police force, a strict merit system for promotions within the department, and an aggressive recruiting drive with higher police salaries to attract professionally qualified officers.^[83] During the professionalism era of policing, law enforcement agencies concentrated on dealing with felonies and other serious crime, rather than broader focus on crime prevention.^[84]

File:Police-antiemeute-p1000485.jpg

The Kansas City Preventive Patrol study in the 1970s found this approach to policing to be ineffective. Patrol officers in cars were disconnected from the community, and had insufficient contact and interaction with the community.^[85] In the 1980s and 1990s, many law enforcement agencies began to adopt community policing strategies, and others adopted problem-oriented policing.

Broken windows policing was another, related approach introduced in the 1980s by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, who suggested that police should pay greater attention to minor «quality of life» offenses and disorderly conduct. This method was first introduced and made popular by New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, in the early 1990s.

The concept behind this method is simple: broken windows, graffiti, and other physical destruction or degradation of property, greatly increases the chances of more criminal activities and destruction of property. When criminals see the abandoned vehicles, trash, and deplorable property, they assume that authorities do not care and do not take active approaches to correct problems in these areas. Therefore, correcting the small problems prevents more serious criminal activity.^[86]

Building upon these earlier models, intelligence-led policing has emerged as the dominant philosophy guiding police strategy. Intelligence-led policing and problem-oriented policing are complementary strategies, both which involve systematic use of information.^[87] Although it still lacks a universally accepted definition, the crux of intelligence-led policing is an emphasis on the collection and analysis of information to guide police operations, rather than the reverse.^[88]

Power restrictions

Main article: Police misconduct

File:AFP-ACTPol truck-Scania P94.jpg

File:2016 Holden Commodore (VF II) SV6 sedan, Western Australia Police (2016-11-12).jpg

In many nations, criminal procedure law has been developed to regulate officers’ discretion, so that they do not arbitrarily or unjustly exercise their powers of arrest, search and seizure, and use of force. In the United States, Miranda v. Arizona led to the widespread use of Miranda warnings or constitutional warnings.

In Miranda the court created safeguards against self-incriminating statements made after an arrest. The court held that «The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way, unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination»^[89]

Police in the United States are also prohibited from holding criminal suspects for more than a reasonable amount of time (usually 24–48 hours) before arraignment, using torture, abuse or physical threats to extract confessions, using excessive force to effect an arrest, and searching suspects’ bodies or their homes without a warrant obtained upon a showing of probable cause. The four exceptions to the constitutional requirement of a search warrant are:

• Consent
• Search incident to arrest
• Motor vehicle searches
• Exigent circumstances

In Terry v. Ohio (1968) the court divided seizure into two parts, the investigatory stop and arrest. The court further held that during an investigatory stop a police officer’s search » [is] confined to what [is] minimally necessary to determine whether [a suspect] is armed, and the intrusion, which [is] made for the sole purpose of protecting himself and others nearby, [is] confined to ascertaining the presence of weapons» (U.S. Supreme Court). Before Terry, every police encounter constituted an arrest, giving the police officer the full range of search authority. Search authority during a Terry stop (investigatory stop) is limited to weapons only.^[89]

Using deception for confessions is permitted, but not coercion. There are exceptions or exigent circumstances such as an articulated need to disarm a suspect or searching a suspect who has already been arrested (Search Incident to an Arrest). The Posse Comitatus Act severely restricts the use of the military for police activity, giving added importance to police SWAT units.

British police officers are governed by similar rules, such as those introduced to England and Wales under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), but generally have greater powers. They may, for example, legally search any suspect who has been arrested, or their vehicles, home or business premises, without a warrant, and may seize anything they find in a search as evidence.

All police officers in the United Kingdom, whatever their actual rank, are ‘constables’ in terms of their legal position. This means that a newly appointed constable has the same arrest powers as a Chief Constable or Commissioner. However, certain higher ranks have additional powers to authorize certain aspects of police operations, such as a power to authorize a search of a suspect’s house (section 18 PACE in England and Wales) by an officer of the rank of Inspector, or the power to authorize a suspect’s detention beyond 24 hours by a Superintendent.

Conduct, accountability and public confidence

Main article: Police misconduct

File:Ftaapolice.png

Police services commonly include units for investigating crimes committed by the police themselves. These units are typically called Inspectorate-General, or in the US, «internal affairs«. In some countries separate organizations outside the police exist for such purposes, such as the British Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Likewise, some state and local jurisdictions, for example, Springfield, Illinois^[91] have similar outside review organizations. The Police Service of Northern Ireland is investigated by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, an external agency set up as a result of the Patten report into policing the province. In the Republic of Ireland the Garda Síochána is investigated by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, an independent commission that replaced the Garda Complaints Board in May 2007.

The Special Investigations Unit of Ontario, Canada, is one of only a few civilian agencies around the world responsible for investigating circumstances involving police and civilians that have resulted in a death, serious injury, or allegations of sexual assault. The agency has made allegations of insufficient cooperation from various police services hindering their investigations.^[92]

In Hong Kong, any allegations of corruption within the police will be investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Independent Police Complaints Council, two agencies which are independent of the police force.

Due to a long-term decline in public confidence for law enforcement in the United States, body cameras worn by police officers are under consideration.^[93]

Use of force

File:Police action during Gezi park protests in Istanbul. Events of June 15, 2013-6.jpg

Police forces also find themselves under criticism for their use of force, particularly deadly force. Specifically, tension increases when a police officer of one ethnic group harms or kills a suspect of another one.^{[citation needed]} In the United States, such events occasionally spark protests and accusations of racism against police and allegations that police departments practice racial profiling.

In the United States since the 1960s, concern over such issues has increasingly weighed upon law enforcement agencies, courts and legislatures at every level of government. Incidents such as the 1965 Watts Riots, the videotaped 1991 beating by Los Angeles Police officers of Rodney King, and the riot following their acquittal have been suggested by some people to be evidence that U.S. police are dangerously lacking in appropriate controls.

The fact that this trend has occurred contemporaneously with the rise of the US civil rights movement, the «War on Drugs«, and a precipitous rise in violent crime from the 1960s to the 1990s has made questions surrounding the role, administration and scope of police authority increasingly complicated.^{[citation needed]}

Police departments and the local governments that oversee them in some jurisdictions have attempted to mitigate some of these issues through community outreach programs and community policing to make the police more accessible to the concerns of local communities, by working to increase hiring diversity, by updating training of police in their responsibilities to the community and under the law, and by increased oversight within the department or by civilian commissions.

In cases in which such measures have been lacking or absent, civil lawsuits have been brought by the United States Department of Justice against local law enforcement agencies, authorized under the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This has compelled local departments to make organizational changes, enter into consent decree settlements to adopt such measures, and submit to oversight by the Justice Department.^{[94][citation needed]}

Protection of individuals

Since 1855, the Supreme Court of the United States has consistently ruled that law enforcement officers have no duty to protect any individual, despite the motto «protect and serve». Their duty is to enforce the law in general. The first such case was in 1855 (Template:Cite court) and the most recent in 2005 (Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales).^[95]

In contrast, the police are entitled to protect private rights in some jurisdictions. To ensure that the police would not interfere in the regular competencies of the courts of law, some police acts require that the police may only interfere in such cases where protection from courts cannot be obtained in time, and where, without interference of the police, the realization of the private right would be impeded.^[96] This would, for example, allow police to establish a restaurant guest’s identity and forward it to the innkeeper in a case where the guest cannot pay the bill at nighttime because his wallet had just been stolen from the restaurant table.

In addition, there are Federal law enforcement agencies in the United States whose mission includes providing protection for executives such as the President and accompanying family members, visiting foreign dignitaries, and other high-ranking individuals.^[97] Such agencies include the United States Secret Service and the United States Park Police.

International forces

Main article: Law enforcement by country

In many countries, particularly those with a federal system of government, there may be several police or police like organizations, each serving different levels of government and enforcing different subsets of the applicable law. The United States has a highly decentralized and fragmented system of law enforcement, with over 17,000 state and local law enforcement agencies.^[98]

Some countries, such as Chile, Israel, the Philippines, France, Austria, New Zealand and South Africa, use a centralized system of policing.^[99] Other countries have multiple police forces, but for the most part their jurisdictions do not overlap. In the United States however, several different law enforcement agencies may have authority in a particular jurisdiction at the same time, each with their own command.

Other countries where jurisdiction of multiple police agencies overlap, include Guardia Civil and the Policía Nacional in Spain, the Polizia di Stato and Carabinieri in Italy and the Police Nationale and National Gendarmerie in France.^[54]

Most countries are members of the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), established to detect and fight transnational crime and provide for international co-operation and co-ordination of other police activities, such as notifying relatives of the death of foreign nationals. Interpol does not conduct investigations or arrests by itself, but only serves as a central point for information on crime, suspects and criminals. Political crimes are excluded from its competencies.

See also

• Chief of police
• Constable
• Criminal citation
• Criminal justice
• Fraternal Order of Police
• Highway Patrol
• Law enforcement agency
• Law enforcement and society
• Law enforcement by country
• Militsiya
• Police academy
• Police brutality
• Police certificate
• Police science
• Police state
• Police training officer
• Private police
• Public administration
• Public Security
• Riot police
• Sheriff
• State Police
• The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc
• Vigilante
• Women in law enforcement
• Police Foundations (Local)

Lists

• List of basic law enforcement topics
• List of countries by size of police forces
• List of law enforcement agencies
• List of protective service agencies
• Police rank

References

Further reading

• Mitrani, Samuel (2014). The Rise of the Chicago Police Department: Class and Conflict, 1850-1894, University of Illinois Press, 272 pages.   Interview with Sam Mitrani: The Function of Police in Modern Society: Peace or Control? (January 2015), The Real News

External links

Look up police in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Media related to Police at Wikimedia Commons
• United Nations Police Division.

Template:Police
Template:Criminal procedure (investigation)
Template:Law

Police or law enforcement agents or agencies are those empowered to use force and other forms of coercion and legal means to effect public and social order. The term is most commonly associated with police departments of a state that are authorized to exercise the police power of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility.

The responsibilities of police include fighting crime, but more generally consist of all activities that maintain the public welfare. This includes both protecting citizens from those who pose a threat, whether from within the community or outside, and preventing them from acting in disorderly fashion or otherwise in ways that disturb the order of society. Some of these responsibilities overlap with those of the military, but the general mandate of the police is to protect citizens, removing the innocent from harm’s way, while the military take a more aggressive responsibility. Law enforcement methods range from the wearing of uniforms and the use of obviously marked vehicles that promote the sense of authority, to investigations of crimes, to undercover operations involving infiltration into suspected criminal groups. In all, though, the task of law enforcement is to maintain a society that operates according to the established norms and laws, for the benefit of all its members.

Etymology

The word police comes from the Latin politia (“civil administration”), which itself derives from the Ancient Greek πόλις, for polis («city»).^[1] Alternative names for police force include constabulary, gendarmerie, police department, police service, or law enforcement agency, and members can be police officers, constables, troopers, sheriffs, rangers, or peace officers.

History

In ancient times, the military was mostly responsible for maintaining law and order in cities. The Roman Empire had a reasonably effective law enforcement’ system until the decline of the empire, though there was never an actual police force in the city of Rome. When under the reign of Augustus the capital had grown to almost one million inhabitants, he created 14 wards, which were protected by seven squads of 1,000 men. If necessary, they might have called the Praetorian Guard for assistance. Beginning in the fifth century, policing became a function of clan chiefs and heads of state.

All civilizations and cultures, from the Babylonians onwards, had a group comparable to the concept of «police.» The Anglo-Saxon system was a private system of tithings, since the Norman conquest lead by a constable, which was based on a social obligation for the good conduct of the others; more common was that local lords and nobles were responsible to maintain order in their lands, and often appointed a constable, sometimes unpaid, to enforce the law.

In Western culture, the contemporary concept of a police paid by the government was developed by French legal scholars and practitioners in the seventeenth century and early eighteenth century. As a result of this development of jurisprudence, the first police force in the modern sense was created by the government of King Louis XIV in 1667 to police the city of Paris, then the largest city of Europe and considered the most dangerous. The royal edict, registered by the Parlement of Paris on March 15, 1667 created the office of lieutenant général de police («lieutenant general of police»), who was to be the head of the new Paris police force, and defined police as the task of «ensuring the peace and quiet of the public and of private individuals, purging the city of what may cause disturbances, procuring abundance, and having each and everyone live according to their station and their duties.» The lieutenant général de police had under his authority 44 commissaires de police («police commissioners»). The city of Paris was divided into 16 districts policed by the 44 commissaires de police, each assigned to a particular district and assisted in their districts by clerks and a growing bureaucracy. The scheme of the Paris police force was extended to the rest of France by a royal edict of October 1699, resulting in the creation of lieutenant generals of police in all large French cities or towns. These police forces were later assisted by inspecteurs de police (“police inspectors”), created in 1709.

After the troubles of the French Revolution, the Paris police force was reorganized by Napoléon I on February 17, 1800, as the Prefecture of Police, along with the reorganization of police forces in all French cities with more than 5,000 inhabitants. On March 12, 1829, a government decree created the first uniformed policemen in Paris and all French cities, known as sergents de ville («city sergeants»), which the Paris Prefecture of Police’s website claims were the first uniformed policemen in the world.^[2]

In the United Kingdom, the development of police forces was much slower than in the rest of Europe. The word «police» was borrowed from French into the English language in the eighteenth century, but for a long time it applied only to French and continental European police forces. The word and the concept of police were «disliked as a symbol of foreign oppression.» Prior to the nineteenth century, the only official use of the word «police» recorded in the United Kingdom was the appointment of Commissioners of Police for Scotland in 1714 and the creation of the Marine Police in 1798 (set up to protect merchandise at the Port of London).

On June 30, 1800, the authorities of Glasgow, Scotland successfully petitioned the government to pass the Glasgow Police Act establishing the City of Glasgow Police. This was the first professional police service in the country that differed from previous law enforcement in that it was a preventive police force. This was quickly followed in other Scottish towns, which set up their own police forces by individual acts of Parliament.^[3] In London, there existed watchmen hired to guard the streets at night since 1663, the first paid law enforcement body in the country, augmenting the force of unpaid constables. On September 29, 1829, the Metropolitan Police Act was passed by Parliament, allowing Sir Robert Peel, then Home Secretary, to found the London Metropolitan Police. This group of police is often referred to as “Bobbies” or “Peelers” due to their being established by Peel. They were regarded as the most efficient forerunners of a modern police force and became a model for the police forces in most countries, such as the United States. Many of the Commonwealth Countries developed police forces using similar models, such as Australia and New Zealand.

In North America, the Toronto Police was founded in Canada in 1834, one of the first municipal police departments on that continent; followed by police forces in Montréal and Québec City, both founded in 1838. In the United States, the first organized police services were established in Boston in 1838, New York in 1844, and Philadelphia in 1854.

Police Divisions

Most police forces contain subgroups whose job it is to investigate particular types of crime.

In most Western police forces, perhaps the most significant division is between «uniformed» police and detectives. Uniformed police, as the name suggests, wear uniforms and perform functions that require an immediate recognition of an officer’s legal authority, such as traffic control, stopping and detaining motorists, and more active crime response and prevention. Detectives, by contrast, wear business attire in bureaucratic and investigative functions where a uniformed presence would be either a distraction or intimidating, but a need to establish police authority still exists. «Plainclothes» officers dress in attire consistent with that worn by the general public for purposes of blending in. In some cases, police are assigned to work «undercover,» where they conceal their police identity, sometimes for long periods, to investigate crimes, such as organized crime, unsolvable by other means. This type of policing shares much with espionage.

Specialized groups exist within many law enforcement organizations either for dealing with particular types of crime, such as traffic law enforcement and crash investigation, homicide, or fraud; or for situations requiring specialized skills, such as underwater search, aviation, explosive device disposal («bomb squad»), and computer crime. Larger jurisdictions also employ specially selected and trained quasi-military units armed with military-grade weapons for the purposes of dealing with particularly violent situations beyond the capability of a patrol officer response, including high-risk warrant service and barricaded suspects. In the United States these units go by a variety of names, but are commonly known as SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams. Because their situational mandate typically focuses on removing innocent bystanders from dangerous people and dangerous situations, not violent resolution, they are often equipped with non-lethal tactical tools like chemical agents, «flashbang» and concussion grenades, and rubber bullets.

Western law enforcement commonly employs «internal affairs» police whose job is to oversee and investigate the officers themselves. They limit their work to fighting bribery, political corruption, and other forms of internal corruption.

Despite popular conceptions promoted by movies and television, many U.S. police departments prefer not to maintain officers in non-patrol bureaus and divisions beyond a certain period of time, such as in the detective bureau, and instead maintain policies that limit service in such divisions to a specified period of time, after which officers must transfer out or return to patrol duties. This is done in part based upon the perception that the most important and essential police work is accomplished on patrol in which officers become acquainted with their beats, prevent crime by their presence, respond to crimes in progress, manage crises, and practice their skills. Detectives, by contrast, usually investigate crimes after they have occurred and after patrol officers have responded first to a situation. Investigations often take weeks or months to complete, during which time detectives spend much of their time away from the streets, in interviews and courtrooms, for example. Rotating officers also promotes cross-training in a wider variety of skills, and serves to prevent «cliques» that can contribute to corruption or other unethical behavior.

Police armament and equipment

In many jurisdictions, police officers carry firearms, primarily handguns, in the normal course of their duties.

Police often have specialist units for handling armed offenders, and similar dangerous situations, and can (depending on local laws), in some extreme circumstances, call on the military (since Military Aid to the Civil Power is a role of many armed forces). A high-profile example of this was when, in 1980 the Metropolitan Police handed control of the Iranian Embassy Siege to the Special Air Service. They can also be equipped with non-lethal (more accurately known as «less than lethal» or «less-lethal») weaponry, particularly for riot control. Non-lethal weapons include batons, riot control agents, rubber bullets, and electroshock weapons. The use of firearms or deadly force is typically a last resort only to be used when necessary to save human life, although some jurisdictions allow its use against fleeing felons and escaped convicts. Police officers often carry handcuffs to restrain suspects.

Modern police forces make extensive use of radio communications equipment, carried both on the person and installed in vehicles, to coordinate their work, share information, and get help quickly. In recent years, vehicle-installed computers have enhanced the ability of police communications, enabling easier dispatching of calls, criminal background checks on persons of interest to be completed in a matter of seconds, and updating the officer’s daily activity log and other required reports on a real-time basis. Other common pieces of police equipment include flashlights, whistles, and, most importantly, notebooks and «ticketbooks» or citations.

Police vehicles

Police vehicles are used for detaining, patrolling, and transporting. The common police patrol vehicle is a four-door sedan (saloon in the UK), much like a normal sedan but with enhancements. Police vehicles are usually marked with appropriate logos and are equipped with sirens and lightbars to aid in making others aware of police presence. Unmarked vehicles are used primarily for apprehending criminals without alerting them to their presence. Some cities and counties have started using unmarked cars, or cars with minimal markings, for traffic law enforcement, since drivers slow down at the sight of marked police vehicles and unmarked vehicles make it easier for officers to catch speeders and traffic violators.

Motorcycles are also commonly used, particularly in locations that a car may not be able to access, or to control potential public order situations involving meetings of motorcyclists. They are often used in escort duties where the motorcycle policeman can quickly clear a path for the escorted vehicle.

Policing strategies

The advent of the police car, two-way radio, and telephone in the early twentieth century transformed policing into a reactive strategy that focused on responding to calls for service.^[4] With this transformation, police command and control became more centralized. August Vollmer introduced other reforms, including education requirements for police officers.^[5] O. W. Wilson, a student of Vollmer, helped reduce corruption and introduce professionalism in Wichita, Kansas, and later in the Chicago Police Department.^[6] Strategies employed by O. W. Wilson included rotating officers from community to community to reduce their vulnerability to corruption, establishing a non-partisan police board to help govern the police force, creating a strict merit system for promotions within the department, and implementing an aggressive, recruiting drive with higher police salaries to attract professionally qualified officers.^[7] During the professionalism era of policing, law enforcement agencies concentrated on dealing with felonies and other serious crime, rather than broader focus on crime prevention.^[8]

The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Study in the 1970s found this approach to policing to be ineffective. Patrol officers in cars were disconnected from the community, and had insufficient contact and interaction with the community.^[9] In the 1980s and 1990s, many law enforcement agencies began to adopt community policing strategies, and others adopted problem-oriented policing. Broken windows policing was another, related approach introduced in the 1980s by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, who suggested that police should pay greater attention to minor «quality of life» offenses and disorderly conduct.^[10] Building upon these earlier models, intelligence-led policing has emerged as the dominant philosophy guiding police strategy. Intelligence-led policing and problem-oriented policing are complementary strategies, both which involve systematic use of information.^[11] Although it still lacks a universally accepted definition, the crux of intelligence-led policing is an emphasis on the collection and analysis of information to guide police operations, rather than the reverse.^[12]

Restrictions on Police Power

In order for police officers to do their job, they may be vested by the state with a monopoly in the use of certain powers. These include the powers to arrest, search, seize, and interrogate; and if necessary, to use lethal force. In nations with democratic systems and the rule of law, the law of criminal procedure has been developed to regulate officers’ discretion, so that they do not exercise their vast powers arbitrarily or unjustly.

In U.S. criminal procedure the most famous case is Miranda v. Arizona, which led to the widespread use of Miranda warnings or constitutional warnings. U.S. police are also prohibited from holding criminal suspects for more than a reasonable amount of time (usually 72 hours) before arraignment, using torture to extract confessions, using excessive force to effect an arrest, and searching suspects’ bodies or their homes without a warrant obtained upon a showing of probable cause. Using deception for confessions is permitted, but not coercion. There are exceptions or exigent circumstances such as an articulated need to disarm a suspect or searching a suspect who has already been arrested (search incident to an arrest). The Posse Comitatus Act severely restricts the use of the U.S. military for police activity, giving added importance to police SWAT units.

British police officers are governed by similar rules, particularly those introduced under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, but generally have greater powers. They may, for example, legally search any suspect who has been arrested, or their vehicles, home, or business premises, without a warrant, and may seize anything they find in a search as evidence. All police officers in the United Kingdom, whatever their actual rank, are “constables” in terms of their legal position. This means that a newly appointed constable has the same arrest powers as a chief constable or commissioner. However, certain higher ranks have additional powers to authorize certain aspects of police operations, such as a power to authorize a search of a suspect’s house (section 18 PACE) by an officer of the rank of inspector, or the power to authorize a suspect’s detention beyond 24 hours by a superintendent.

Police conduct and accountability

Investigation of police corruption is sometimes made more difficult by a code of silence that encourages unquestioning loyalty to comrades over the cause of justice. If an officer breaks this code, they may receive death threats or even be left for dead, as in the case of Frank Serpico. One way to fight such corruption is by having an independent or semi-independent organization investigate, such as (in the United States) the Federal Justice Department, state attorneys general, local district attorneys, a police department’s own internal affairs division, or specially appointed commissions. However, independent organizations are generally not used except for the most severe cases of corruption.

Use of force

Police forces also find themselves under criticism for their use of force, particularly deadly force, when a police officer of one race kills a suspect of another race. In the United States, such events routinely spark protests and accusations of racism against police.

In the United States since the 1960s, concern over such issues has increasingly weighed upon law enforcement agencies, courts, and legislatures at every level of government. Incidents such as the 1965 Watts Riots, the videotaped 1991 beating by Los Angeles police officers of Rodney King, and the riot following their acquittal has depicted American police as dangerously lacking in appropriate controls. The fact that this trend has occurred contemporaneously with the rise of the U.S. civil rights movement, the «War on Drugs,» and a precipitous rise in violent crime from the 1960s to the 1990s has made questions surrounding the role, administration, and scope of authority of police specifically and the criminal justice system as a whole increasingly complicated. Police departments and the local governments that oversee them in some jurisdictions have attempted to mitigate some of these issues through community outreach programs and community policing to make the police more accessible to the concerns of local communities; by working to increase hiring diversity; by updating training of police in their responsibilities to the community and under the law; and by increased oversight within the department or by civilian commissions. In cases in which such measures have been lacking or absent, local departments have been compelled by legal action initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice under the 14th Amendment to enter into consent decree settlements to adopt such measures and submit to oversight by the Justice Department.

Some believe that police forces have been responsible for enforcing many bigoted perspectives. Ageism against teens, classism, homophobia, racism, and sexism are views that police have been charged with having held and enforced. Some police organizations are faced with routine accusations of racial profiling.

Recruitment

The social status and pay of police can lead to problems with recruitment and morale. Jurisdictions lacking the resources or the desire to pay police appropriately, lacking a tradition of professional and ethical law enforcement, or lacking adequate oversight of the police often face a dearth of quality recruits, a lack of professionalism and commitment among their police, and broad mistrust of the police among the public. These situations often strongly contribute to police corruption and brutality. This is particularly a problem in countries undergoing social and political development; countries that lack rule of law or civil service traditions; or countries in transition from authoritarian or communist governments in which the prior regime’s police served solely to support the ruling government.

Police Worldwide

There exist a number of key differences among police forces worldwide. The first of these is the police force’s connection with their country’s military. Separation of these forces is one key way of protecting citizens’ freedom and democracy. Separation from the prosecution of crimes is equally important. Another difference is the use of weapons. Many countries, notably those in western Europe, do not carry firearms. This raises a debate over the perceived freedom of a people in a state in correlation with the arming of their local police.

In many countries, particularly those with a federal system of government, there may be several police or police-like organizations, each serving different levels of government and enforcing different subsets of the applicable law. The United States has a highly decentralized and fragmented system of law enforcement, with over 17,000 state and local law enforcement agencies.^[13] Other countries, such as Chile, Israel, and Austria, use a centralized system of policing.^[14] Though the United States and other countries have multiple police forces, for the most part their jurisdictions do not overlap. In some countries, jurisdiction of multiple police agencies overlap, as with Guardia Civil and the Policía Nacional in Spain.^[15]
Also, most countries are members of the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), established to detect and fight transnational crime and provide for international cooperation and coordination of other police activities, such as notifying relatives of the death of foreign nationals. Interpol does not conduct investigations or arrests by itself, but only serves as a central point for information on crime, suspects, and criminals. Political crimes are excluded from its competencies.

Notes

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Adler, Freda. Criminal Justice: An Introduction. McGraw Hill, 2005. ISBN 0072993286
• Coady, Tony. Violence and Police Culture. Melbourne University Press, 2000. ISBN 0522847889
• Crank, John. Police Ethics: The Corruption of Noble Cause. Anderson, 1999.
• Das, Dilip K., and Otwin Marenin. Challenges of Policing Democracies: A World Perspective. Routledge, 2000. ISBN 978-9057005589
• Foster, Raymond. Police Technology. Prentice Hall, 2004. ISBN 0131149571
• Kappeler, Victor. Critical Issues in Police Civil Liability. Waveland Press, 2006. ISBN 1577664418
• Kleinig, John. The Ethics of Policing. Cambridge University Press, 1996. ISBN 0521484332
• Miller, Richard. Drug Warriors and Their Prey: From Police Power to Police State. Praeger Trade, 1996. ISBN 0275950425
• Nelson, Jill. Police Brutality: An Anthology. W.W. Norton, 2001. ISBN 0393321630
• Panzarella, Robert, and Daniel Vona. Criminal Justice Masterworks: A History of Ideas about Crime, Law, Police, and Corrections. Carolina Academic Press, 2006. ISBN 1594602298
• Paoline, Eugene. Rethinking Police Culture: Officers’ Occupational Attitudes. LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2001. ISBN 1931202133
• Pastor, James. The Privatization of Police in America: An Analysis and Case Study. McFarland, 2003. ISBN 0786415746
• Russell, Francis. A City in Terror: The 1919 Boston Police Strike. Penguin, 1977. ISBN 0140044140
• Swanson, Charles. Police Administration: Structures, Processes, and Behavior. Prentice Hall, 2007. ISBN 0131589334
• Walker, Samuel. The Police in America: An Introduction. McGraw Hill, 2007. ISBN 0073527920