Police Policy Analysis

Introduction to the issue

The United States may have one of the strongest governments in the world, but every day someone special loses their life. It displays a weakness in our own government and if we want a promising future this has to change. A good step in that direction would be recognizing my policy memo. My policy memo is: Using Technology and Data to advance community policing. The focus of this policy is through funding; the government has recently funded making new technology for a better police force. This policy research memo will focus on the issue background, then the political environment, along with a policy analysis. Lastly, I will discuss my own options and recommendations on how I would implement the policy.

Before

discussing the background information, I would go more in depth about the policy and reveal its significance. The history of this issue goes back a few months with many lives being taken by police enforcement. Low-income communities will always have crime issues because of the environment; the citizens live in a place that causes them to act in an illegal manner. It becomes serious when the police officers, which are supposed to protect them, are committing murders. It’s time for the government to step in and financially helps these communities. As one can see this policy is significant because it could change how children grow up in America. This policy could change generations for the better. The policy would take some time to go fully in effect, but with this government funding, the new technology, and support. It will be a great investment.

Issue Background

First, the technology component of the policy is connected with my studies at Shippensburg University. I want to be a part of the technology creation process and use my software skills to help it reach its maximum potential. Also, being from Philadelphia, I know what people in crime filled communities need in order to improve them. Secondly, the crime in cities and the actions of police officers has driven me to this policy. The Mike Brown case is a prime example. In summary, Mike Brown was a teenager who just graduated high school. While walking down the street with his friend, he was approached by a cop car. The cop approaches the young boys and asks them a few questions. While the officer was walking away, Brown allegedly pushes the officer and they began to scuffle. In the scuffle the cop noticed Brown reaching for his gun, now the cop thinks he is being “physically assaulted”, while Brown was departing the area out of fear. He was shot several times and eventually died. The case was taken to court and the cop could be charged with about four possible crimes such as first-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter. The court decision of the case was to not indict the cop because the boy did not respect and restraint when dealing with the officer. No law was implemented after this case; however, it did cause uproar and riots. I’m not going to discuss who was right or wrong. However, with the government funding technology in communities like this, the jury could of saw the whole altercation through a series of cameras and made the right decision.

Political Environment

This is an occurring issue, so it makes sense that so many political actors would be involved. This leads legislative actors, executive authority, the courts, and a stakeholder to be involved in the topic. Every political actor has some positive aspects, however, some of the actors don’t completely agree with what the government is conducting. To start, President Barack Obama and Senator Tom Coburn are some of the legislature actors who are intensely politically involved. President Obama is an active supporter of putting cameras on police officer’s uniforms. The government, with the support of President Obama, has funded about 263 million to 500,000 police officers with these body cameras. Now, this is just the beginning stage, but the President believes it could get better over time. The President is beginning to assign new training for police officers on how to properly handle certain situations. According to The Hill, the website article states, “the president will ask departments to develop a consistent list of equipment that police departments are eligible to acquire, require a local civilian review of all requests, and mandate police departments receive the necessary training to use the equipment properly”(Sink). Senator Tom Coburn believes they are making a mistake and thinks differently from President Obama. Coburn believes the government should have no role in funding police departments. He believes the government shouldn’t spend money on police cameras or new bulletproof voices. Coburn thinks its spending unnecessary money because it can be prevented with better training. According to the website Police One, another officer hears this news and states, “Ann Carrizales testified that while she feels fortunate to work for a department that provides officers with the equipment they need, others are forced to choose between what is more important to officer safety and how much money to put into ensuring their officer's safety"(White). While both legislative actors make good points, the government tended to lean toward the President’s views.

The Police Executive Research Forum is one the executive agencies dealing with this policy.

This agency is also known as “PERF” and their focus is mainly anything dealing with police officers, plus technology is important to them because it can change plenty of lives. This law enforcement agency deals with using government funding and donations to help increase policing in communities, while taking in consideration the officer’s life. Their position is to support the police, along with promoting the importance of safety. Some of their ideas are a nationwide public safety broadband network, next generation 911, Real-Time crime centers, and cybercrime. For example, Government Tech goes into detail with Real-Time Centers, which states, “Facilities that can gather vast amounts of crime-related data, such as arrest records, mug shots and warrant information, and then push it out to officers and investigators in the field, are expected to have an impact on crime investigations in the future, according to PERF ”(Kidd). The agency has some great ideas in the works. The next political actor would be the court, but they are involved in a different way. The courts aren’t upheld or anything in this policy, however the decisions in certain court cases made the police relevant to many people and others began to take notice. The courts didn’t play a major role, but their actions played an important role. Lastly, the final political actor is a stakeholder, named The Office of Community

Oriented Policing, also known as C.O.P.S. This interest group devotes their service to raising money for technology. The government heard of the organization and decided to help, by also making them a part of the Department of Justice. The C.O.P.S website states, “The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (C.O.P.S Office) is proud to announce awards totaling more than $6 million under the Community Policing Development (CPD) award program” (U.S. Department of Justice). This interest group is probably the most powerful for this particular policy. This interest group is primarily based on other resources such as knowledge of the subject. Like previously stated, this policy is based on around many horrible crimes, so a group like this is not surprising. The group is made up of professionals and people who volunteered their time. All of these political actors have either contributed or taken away from the policy memo. This policy is so great because it’s so complex and will affect millions of people.

Policy Analysis

The policy memo focuses primarily on issues regarding the police force.

A few issues are the police officers themselves, the court system, and simply knowing what to do in certain situations. I have three recommendations that help these issues such as body cameras, a special court system, and retraining police officers. First, the body camera idea has been floating around the news lately. As previously stated, President Obama has funded these cameras and they will be implemented soon, however, I would like to recommend on how to use them. The camera could be on the waist of the officer along with their utility belt. The cameras must be turned on during their shift and turned off at the end. At the end of the day, someone will review the camera footage and write reports on the officers. The pros of this recommendation is the feedback and seeing the actions of the police officers to be used in the courts, while the cons could be people inferring with the footage or the officers blocking the camera somehow. The cost of these cameras is the consequence, because there are an abundance of police stations and for every cop to have a body camera would cost millions of dollars. My second recommendation would be establishing a special court system that handles murders committed by police officers. The judge could review the body camera tape, hear both sides, and then make his or her decision. It could reduce rioting and uproar within communities. A pro of this court system is simply

giving justice to whoever truly deserves it. A con is the amount of time each case could take and the amount of cases that could appear in front of the judge. Expected consequences if proven guilty should be prison, the amount of time is based on the judge. The cost shouldn’t be any more than the other court systems. My last recommendation would be retraining police officers. All officers could go through training on how to handle certain situations, in order to prevent unnecessary murders. All cops should go this program, and this brings a con. There would be too many cops and it would take a long time. However, the pro is much more rewarding because it could save the lives plenty of innocent people. This program will be very expensive and the expected consequence is fewer cops on duty while the program is going on. These recommendations will improve the policy.

Options and Recommendations

There are two options a government official could take to address the issue; the options are in favor or against. There aren’t any officials who can go both ways, because if they support a singe idea of the policy, then they support the whole thing. Every idea builds off each other, so they would just in favor of the policy. If the government official were in favor of the policy than the expected outcomes would be lowering the crime rate, police being monitored, and new technology that can help people everyday lives. Some recommendations on what to do is spread the word of the organizations out there trying to help and gain some more funding. Also get others involved because other citizens could have more ideas on how to push the policy forward. If the government were not in favor than would expect murdering of innocent lives, a messed up court system, and everything would be stagnant. Some recommendations on what to do would be to find another way to handle these issues, if my policy isn’t in their favor. In conclusion, my policy memo is: Using Technology and Data to advance community policing. The focus of this policy is through funding; the government has recently funded making new technology for a better police force. This could take the future of America in a great direction and create longer lives of the youth. It would create one less problem the government has to worry about. Thank you for your time, and hopefully you’re in favor of this policy.