Você está na página 1de 4

Police: History - Early Policing In England, The Beginning Of "modern" Policing In

England, Early Policing In Colonial America

Throughout the history of civilization, societies have sought protection for their members and
possessions. In early civilizations, members of one's family provided this protection. Richard
Lundman has suggested that the development of formal policing resulted from a process of
three developmental stages. The first stage involves informal policing, where all members of a
society share equally in the responsibility for providing protection and keeping order. The
second stage, transitional policing, occurs when police functions are informally assigned to
particular members of the society. This stage serves as a transition into formal policing, where
specific members of the community assume formal responsibility for protection and social
control. Lundman suggests that the history of police involved a shift from informal to formal
policing. Indeed, as societies have evolved from mechanical (members share similar beliefs
and values but meet their basic needs independently) to organic (members are dependent
upon one another as a result of specialization) societies, social control became more complex.
Whereas there was little need for formal, specialized policing in mechanical societies, organic
societies require more specialization to ensure public order.

Over time, organic societies developed into states and governments. A state is defined as "a
political creation that has the recognized authority to use and maintain a monopoly on the use
of force within a clearly defined jurisdiction," while a government is a "political institution of
the state that uses organization, bureaucracy, and formality to regulate social interactions"
(Gaines et al., p. 1). The origins of formal policing began with the organization of societies into
states and governments.

The form of government heavily influences the structure of police organizations. As Lang-
worthy and Travis have argued, "since all police systems rely on state authority, the source of
state power ultimately represents the basis of police authority as well" (p. 42). Different forms
of government have established different types of police forces. Shelley suggests that there are
four different models of policing (i.e., communist, Anglo-Saxon, continental, and colonial) that
differ based on their sources of legitimacy, organizational structure, and police function. The
present author suggests that the communist model of policing obtains legitimacy through the
communist political party, is organized as a centralized, armed militarized force, and performs
the functions of crime control and enforcement of state ideology. The continental and colonial
models have similar organizational structures and functions as the communist model, however
the continental model obtains its legitimacy through the central government while the colonial
model establishes legitimacy through the colonial authority. In comparison, the Anglo-Saxon
model obtains legitimacy through local governments and is based in law. This model is
organized as a decentralized force that is armed in some countries (United States) and not in
others (England). Finally, police functions in this model include crime control, order
maintenance, and welfare and administrative responsibilities.

In this entry, a historical description of the Anglo-Saxon model of policing is presented. The
changes in the mission, strategies, and organizational structures of policing through different
time periods are examined. A particular emphasis is placed on the historical roots of policing
in England and their influence on modern policing in America. This entry will also detail the
changes of American police forces since their establishment in the 1800s as organizations of
social control. Current debate about recent changes in the mission, strategies, and
organizational structures of police will be described and the future of police organizations will
be examined.
History of Westminster Policing

More than 90 years ago — on Dec. 6, 1920, to be precise — the


Westminster Common Council approved the appointment of two additional
"night patrolmen" to the ranks of the Westminster Police Department.

According to an old file copy of the history of the Westminster Police Department,
"It was felt that there existed inadequate protection due to the number of
frequent 'robberies and bank holdups.' "

The first recorded "constable" in the city's history was William Grumbine,
appointed June 20, 1839 — just two days after the city passed its ordinance
establishing town constables, according to the police history account.

"Constables were paid 33 1/2 cents for every person apprehended. … They would
work from their homes and walk to handle any calls for service."

"Borough Constable" was the title given to law enforcement officials during the
early period of Westminster's incorporation.

A history of the department reports that it was "on May 20, 1850, Westminster's
law enforcement title of Borough or Town Constable changed to 'City Bailiff,' with
Mr. Elias Yingling being appointed as the City's first Bailiff. The title of Bailiff,
referring to law enforcement officials, continued until 1979."

Although the records are somewhat unclear, it appears that it was a three-man
force for much of the 1920s. The two "night patrolmen" assumed their duties on
Dec. 22, 1920, at a pay rate of $60 a month.

The first mention of the officers being armed does not occur until July 5, 1927,
when the bailiffs requested "to obtain a gun …"

This was just a few years after the first mention of a uniform. The records note
that it was discussed during a May 1924 council meeting that "officers should be
in uniform when on duty. … A uniform procurement order (came) on June 24,
1924.

When Westminster was first incorporated on Feb. 5, 1819, there was no mention
of a police department or a police chief. The only charter offices set forth were
that of six commissioners, a burgess, a clerk and "one judge to hold the first
election for burgess and commissioners."

The office of a "street commissioner" was added to the 1838 and 1856 city charter.
The responsibilities of street commissioner and "police chief" were one and the
same until May 1927.
However, it was not until 1946 that the designation "police chief" first appears in
city records, and the city bailiff in 1946 earned between $132 and $140 per
month.

Today, the department's authorized-force is 45 officers and, a Westminster


officer starts at about $37,000 a year," according to articles in The Eagle and
the Baltimore Sun.

During this holiday season, say a prayer of thanks for the work of our
Westminster police officers, public works personnel, and firefighters. These men
and women are working hard, away from their families, to keep us safe for the
Christmas season. God bless them for their work.

Law Enforcement in the Philippines


Law enforcement is a term used to define the act of enforcing the law; and a law
enforcement officer is a government employee who is responsible for the prevention,
investigation, apprehension, or detention of individuals suspected or convicted of offenses
against the criminal laws, including an employee engaged in this activity who is transferred
to a supervisory or administrative position; or serving as a probation or pretrial services officer
(UsLegal.com).In the Philippines, a country located in Asia, law enforcement has been
mainly entrusted to the main law enforcement group, the Philippine National Police, in
collaboration to other law enforcement agencies like the National Bureau of Investigation,
Bureau of Corrections, Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, Bureau of Fire
Protection; and the auxiliary groups like the Barangay Tanod, Traffic Management Groups,
Security agencies and the like. The list of laws in the Philippines is actually good. One of the
law on climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) was even
mentioned by the UN special envoy Margareta Washlstrom in 2012 as the best in the world.
However, even if how good the law is, if its enforcement is weak, then the law will be of no
use. Philippine law is one of the best there is, but how about the law enforcement group that
is supposed to enforce it? Can the law enforcement group live up to the expectation?
According to Roque, H. (2010), a human rights lawyer, there is something wrong with the
national police. It is viewed more as a source of livelihood for the policemen rather than an
institution to protect law and order, Roque said one of the force's biggest problems was
corruption. There have been many accounts of

prospective recruits paying bribes to join the service, and paying again to get important posts
with the express intention of using their positions to make money. The statement of Roque
was actually seen during the bus hostage crisis that occurred last 2010 in Manila, when eight
(8) Hong Kong nationals were killed. According to reporter Chick, K. (2010), the incident
exposed how corrupt the law enforcement agency is. During this crisis situation, the
Philippine National Police displayed the lack of training of the officers who responded to the
situation, the lack of equipments and poor communication problem among the organization.
According to the report, the bullets
that were discovered on the victim’s body were also investigated as it was
suspected to
have come from the police officers who were supposed to save them. According to the
report of the Center for Police Management and Development in2005, the police
force could not function properly because of the lack budget allocation,which in turn caused
the lack of equipment for the police force to properly enforce thelaw, the number of police
officers were less than the required number in the society, andthe police offices and lock-up
cells were poorly made.This situation of the police force, tasked to enforce the law, resulted
to the poorlaw enforcement system of the country. If we try to analyse it, the root cause for
thepoor law enforcement in the country is neither the lack of budget, nor the lack
ofequipments and force, the real cause of the problem is the corruption in the system andthe
lack of cooperation from the Filipino people.Like what Attorney Roque said, there have been
many accounts of recruitspaying bribes just to enter the police force, and their purpose is for
gain. If that is thekind of law enforcement officers that they have, then they cannot expect a
good service.

If those unqualified individuals enter the police force through bribery, then what willhappen
to the law enforcement system of the
country? Another problem to the law enforcement system, aside from corruption,
is thelack of cooperation from the people. Sewell, E. (2013), stated that Filipino do not
careenough to take a stand against corruption. He further said that Filipinos have no one
toblame but their own apathy. This, I believe, is true. If only the people or the Filipino people
themselves would be more involved in what is happening around them, then theissue on
corruption would have been minimized, and the law enforcement system wouldhave
improved.The point is, the people themselves should be the first to make a stand to have
achange because they are the most powerful people in a nation; and until the people could
have their stand, only then will there be a change in the system, including law enforcement.