Modern System Of Policing Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Modern System Of Policing - Essay Example Scholars looked as if they were busy discussing the politics of police reform. Researching of the causes of modern policing was considered in a superficial manner, more often presumed than proved. Cities switched unavoidably to modern policing as a result of increasing degree s of crime and disorder in a period of phenomenal growth as well as intense social change (Schneider 1980 p 54). During the above mentioned period London was plagued via crime as well as the safety of a lot of citizens was doubtful. Pick pocketing, gambling and robbery were ordinary amongst the crimes that took place. An essential factor in Sir Robert Peel's plan was the division of policing as well as the judiciary. Peel believed that police should be accountable for one side of the law, it was called the examination phase (Hurd 2007). Even till today, this idea remains almost unchanged. Until 1829, law enforcement had been dramatically lacking in organization. As London expanded during the 18th and 19th centuries, maintaining law and order had become a priority and also a matter of public concern. The policing system was seen as ineffective and failing dismally to restore and maintain peace and order. Previous systems were i... Overall it was counterproductive and inefficient. Victims of crime became reluctant to prosecute, as did the jury with regards to conviction. In spite of its early plausibility, the concept that the police were formed in the reaction to a crime wave is dull and wrong. Moreover, it is not a very valid o explanation. It presumes that "when crime increases to a particular level it is only a 'natural' social response to make a modern police force. This obliviously is not a clarification but a statement of a natural law apart from this it yields very little proof. We cannot leave out the possibility that the revolts of slave, rebellion, and other such examples of collective violence resulted in the creation of modern police, however we must keep in mind that neither crime nor disorder were not uncommon in the cities of the nineteenth-century, and thus cannot in any way be responsible for a change similar to the development of such a institution. Violent mobs were in power of a lot of parts of London throughout the summer of 1780; however the modern Police did not emerge till 1829. Getting drunk in Public was a severe problem in the early 1775, however a modern police force did not emerge till 1838.3 therefore the crime-and-disorder theory is unsuccessful in providing reasons as to why earlier waves of crime didn't create modern police.Bowling (1999) researched the decrease in the rate of homicide in New York and believes that belligerent policing is only one factor which contributes to the decline of homicide. He states that the most persuasiv e argument for the increase and decrease of murder in New York is the increase and decrease of the crack cocaine sale which, as he believes to be reciprocal. Another reason

How to Criticize Up and Down Your Organization and Make It Pay Off Essay

How to Criticize Up and Down Your Organization and Make It Pay Off - Essay Example That said, Weisinger points out that criticism is necessary for growth. For instance, Weisinger (1989) states that the Romantic period in philosophy, politics and the arts came about because the individuals involved with the Romantic period criticized the neoclassical period, and because criticism of the neoclassical followers had their criticism suppressed. Weisinger (1989) further point out that Louis the XIV suppressed criticism, and the response to this was the American and French revolutions. In other words, when criticism is stifled a cataclysm might develop which changes the status quo. Moreover, Weisinger states that criticism from the likes of Galileo, Darwin and Freud changes societies in general. Criticism is necessary for growth, and criticism cannot be suppressed without consequences. Therefore, according to Weisinger (1989), criticism, being necessary for growth and change, and being necessary to influence, motivate and change behavior, must be expressed in a positive w ay so that the criticism can be accepted and useful, as opposed to simply negative and demoralizing. Weisinger further states that there are barriers to individuals accepting criticism and applying the criticism to their lives to makes themselves, and the organization, better. There are psychological hurdles which must be overcome. Weisinger talks in terms of cognitive appraisal, which means that individuals have a mental framework with which they receive information like criticism, and this framework dictates how the criticism will be processed. The framework is built through classical conditioning – criticism in the past has produced a negative response, so present criticism, even if tactfully presented, will also present the negative response. Moreover, since criticism is often portrayed in the media as negative – such as headlines which link criticism to failure – the mind links the two concepts together. Criticism equals failure. Modeling is another psychol ogical force at work, and this means that how one’s family criticized one another is what is known to the individual. If one’s parents responds to criticism by yelling, making retaliatory comments, or leaving the room, the individual is likely to do the same. The modeling focuses upon how one criticizes, as well as how one reacts to criticism. Operant learning is also a force at work, and this is when an individual does X, he gets the result of Y. A worker responds to criticism with anger, so the supervisor backs off. This reinforces the angry response, so that the worker continues to use this response when criticized. Since criticism is obviously necessary, because there can be no growth and change without it, and individuals are hard-wired either to not accept criticism gracefully or to give criticism in a counter-productive manner, what can be done? This question is the focus of Heidringer’s book and and analysis. The bulk of the analysis is that criticism mu st be redefined in a manner that it is not seen as tearing somebody down, but, rather, giving them information which they can use to improve. This is an important message to myself and my future career growth, not just because it is inevitable that I will be criticized, so I need to know how to handle this criticism and apply it so that it is not negative but positive, but also because it will help me learn how to criticize so that any team that I