Fluent Essays

Discuss the 2 roles of police officers: the public servant and the crime fighter. Utilize current research to explain why some people may believe police subculture is breaking down. Review the video titled “Constitutional Law and the Criminal Justice System)” found in this module's Learn section. Integrate an analysis of “Biblical Themes,” legalism, and licentiousness, as discussed in the video. How do these concepts tie into the roles of police officers as public servants and crime fighters?  500 words Enforcement Officers must operate on the purview of the United States Constitution there are clear constitutional limitations on police behavior the 4th Amendment provides civilians protection against unreasonable searches and seizures case law has helped define the interpretation of what constitutes an reasonable in this and also what constitutes a search and seizure the 4th Amendment is only a political will to governmental actions including local state and federal enforcement the scope of constitutional protections does not however impose upon the actions of private individuals or companies the 4th Amendment also concerns itself with what is regarded as the reasonable expectation of privacy and certain circumstances an individual would not have a reasonable expectation of privacy and so it may not fall under the purview of the 4th Amendment laws continue to evolve and the Constitution continues to be subjected to evaluation and interpretation a warrant must be obtained in order to search or seize officers must also establish probable cause to suggest that they have enough evidence against a suspect to authorize issuance of a warrant in some instances police officers can conduct warrantless searches and seizures one type of warrantless seizure is known as a Terry stop or a stop and frisk in these unique circumstances law enforcement only need have reasonable suspicion not probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime the 5th Amendment contends that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself as such the 5th Amendment provides defendants the constitutional protection of refusing to testify against themselves the 5th Amendment also requires that a defendant provided due process at all stages of the legal process due process interest fairness in all the matters in Miranda vs Arizona in 1906. 6 The Supreme Court ruled that before individuals in police custody or question they must be provided clarity about their constitutional rights however this warning is only necessary when an individual is in police custody and police officers are intending to interrogate or question that individual it is further only specific to testimonial statement evidence made by the suspect if a suspect is read their Miranda rights and does not respond police officers can still continue to question the suspect and in the information obtain can be admissible there is an additional public safety exception to the Aranda rule as well in other words please do not have to provide a verandah warning if there is an immediate threat to public safety if the suspect provides any statements under this public safety exception statements can be admissible against the individual at trial the 6th Amendment provides defendants many constitutional protections but most importantly it provides defendants the right to have assistance of counsel for his defense as soon as charges are filed against the defendant the 6th Amendment protections begin and Messiah versus the United States in 1964 the Supreme Court ruled that questioning the defendant without their lawyer present whether openly or secretly interferes with the attorneys ability to represent their clients and therefore is rendered unconstitutional and a violation of the 6th Amendment so once a defendant has been formally charged with a quantum questioning must take place in the presence of a lawyer or if any statements are discovered in obtained in violation of the Messiah rule the exclusionary rule or suppressing the evidence would apply. Law enforcement must be ethical in all of their practices when individuals are providing statements law enforcement officers have the duty to provide appropriate warnings under the purview of the Constitution This also helps to avoid false confessions law enforcement officers have the ethical duty to avoid 3rd degree tactics during interrogation In addition the use of force has been a major concern for the public Tennessee versus Garner in 1905 addressed the fleeing felon controversy the Supreme Court said that deadly force is considered a seizure it is therefore subject to the reasonableness requirement under the 4th Amendment the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to use deadly force unless the suspects escape would pose significant risk and serious harm to other people in society there is what is known as the use of force continuum the use of force continuum serves as a guideline for law enforcement officers with respect to the type of force that should be applied in specific situations a level one begins with the officers physical appearance level 2 represents officers using clear and deliberate verbal commands level of 3 allows officers to use o.c. pepper spray and various other incapacitating agents to subdue suspects hard techniques represent level 4 on the continuum and include actions such as take downs tasers and baton level 5 represents deadly force and has the highest level of force on the continuum law enforcement officers are subjected to many policing stressors police officers are upheld to managing constitutional and legal protections officers are constantly exposed to dangerous situations which also cause a great deal of stress some of the most cited issues concerning police stressors include failing management and overall lack of supervisory support some officers pacifically female officers report stress and managing family responsibilities work hours and traumatizing events can interfere with how. Individuals transition from Officer to home life it is also reported that sexual orientation discrimination of lesbian gay bisexual and transgendered people exist in the police force and creates a barrier of hostility among work colleagues research reports l g b t officers experience verbal harassment sexual harassment discriminatory slurs and even death threats research purports that over 90 percent of l g b t officers report being on the receiving end of some type of negative experience Furthermore research finds that there is a pervasive discriminatory attitude among police chiefs citing difficulty in working with gay and lesbian officers because of the close occupational bond police officers have with one another when one agency experiences a traumatic situation all officers will regard this event as an assault on them as a community it is recommended that departments provide assistance and advocacy for military veterans and offer greater support services for police officers who might be experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder also strategizing the need for assisting law enforcement officers is necessary there are times when police officers may cope with stress and traumatic experiences by consuming alcohol or taking illegal drugs these practices can also lead to depression domestic violence and even suicide all of these elements are important for maintaining departmental culture the reason we need criminal justice professionals to begin with is due to the problem of sin Ultimately the solution to sin is only found in Christ but in this world the criminal justice system works to limit the effects of sin therefore it is helpful to understand the basic dimensions of sin remember that all crimes are sins but not all sins are crimes crimes are only those violations of in alienable rights of others the criminal justice system works to prevent and punish crimes another way to look at sin is defined by Scripture it's really by looking at the categories. Legalism and licentiousness both can lead to criminal behavior but as with all types in they start with sinful and destructive attitudes of the heart legalism and licentiousness are both based upon self righteousness insofar as they reject the righteousness of God as defined in Scripture and is available soley through Christ legalism assumes that we are righteous to our own good behavior as if we could ever earn God's approval through our conduct and family connections a society that is more infatuated with this tendency is more apt to embrace a whitewash moralism which posits good external behavior and favors a vial of practices like slavery and racism Meanwhile the other extreme but just as self-righteous is licentiousness which favors all manner of personal discretion in the practice of life choices and as such also rejects God's moral law this perspective favors the weakening of the family and community bonds in the name of glorifying individual choices because it feels good to do it it rejects the same to be of sexual intimacy as defined by Scripture solely between a man and a woman and only in marriage and also puts personal choice above the sanctity of life including the unborn So while I might be quick to reject things like racism it also contributes to the weakening of the moral and covenantal bond we need to care for one another and to preserve order and justice in society further it can lead to addictive destructive behavior such as drug use which again is criminal because it is a violation of persons in alienable rights we do have the unfettered right to destroy our lives so the government is mandated to save us from ourselves in those situations.