It is human nature for problems to arise any time one side is told what to do by
another. With regard to police abuse, there will be many officers who feel that their job of
fighting escalating street crime, gangs, narcotics violations, and other
violent crimes is difficult enough already, and that worrying about excessive
policy for abusive behavior will only further decrease their ability to
fight crime effectively, efficiently, and safely. Citizens, however, have
been caught up in this gung-ho attitude, and police are more and more often
crossing the line of investigation and interrogation with abusive behavior.
This abuse must be monitored so that police do not forget who they are
serving--not themselves, but the public. This means that even the
criminals, who are a part of the public, have certain rights, particularly,
civil rights. All citizens must be aware of these rights to protect
themselves against over-aggressive officers who take advantage of their
position as badge and gun holders to intimidate and abuse civilians for
personal or departmental goals.
Such conflicts have significant implications on departmental and
administrative policy procedures. One of the main police abuse problems is
physical brutality. The main goal here should be to get the police
departments to adopt and enforce a written policy governing the use of
physical force. The policy should restrict physical force to the narrowest
possible range of specific situations. For example, their should be
limitations on the use of hand-to-hand combat, batons, mace, stun guns, and
firearms. However, limiting polices' actions will bring much debate,
especially from police officers and administrators themselves. Many feel
that their firepower is already too weak to battle the weapons criminals
have on the streets, and limiting their legality of gun use will not only
endanger them, but the innocent...