In tackling the issues social disorganization presented, law enforcement departments country-wide needed to make vast changes to their old methods. In the 1980s, community support and feedback began to take a dominate position in policing. A new philosophical change was emerging within America’s law enforcement agencies (Roberg, 2009). One of the key implementations in community policing is the permanent assignments of beats and shifts to patrol officers (Lersch, 2011). This allows for officers and citizens to become familiar and trusting with one another. Also, these newly familiarized citizens were to have greater input in police activity including suggesting problem areas, attending police-community meetings, and even assessing police performance (Roberg, 2009). Decentralization was also extremely important to the notion of community policing. Police precincts, in municipalities where community policing has been implemented, are now well-spread through entire cities and oftentimes include store-front police departments in hopes to decrease response time as well as appear more open to citizens and their input (Lersch, 2011). Community policing also calls for a stronger emphasis on prevention. Proactive policing encourages officers to become more familiar with possible future criminal opportunities and conditions prior to it affecting the community (Roberg, 2009). Through problem-oriented policing, and the use of the SARA Model (Scanning, Analysis, Response, and Assessment) communities, in conjunction with law enforcement, determine what are the most critical issues facing the community, carefully examine the issue at hand, attempt proactive policing methods in the resolution of the problem, and then assess whether the issue has been resolved or if further assessment and response will be required (Lersch, 2011). Through increased positive interaction and partnerships with community services and inhabitants, law enforcement can gain trust and information while combatting those issues most dire to specific neighborhoods (Roberg, 2009).
The main criticism of community policing is the extent to which socially disorganized areas will be willing to work with law enforcement. The methods mentioned above have been shown to be extremely effective within communities that already display social cohesion and bonding. Where this cohesion is lacking or nonexistent are the areas most in need of community policing, however, cooperation levels are much more diminished. The perceived cause of this failure is due to the continued discounting of the conditions that originally allowed for these subcultures to persist (Lersch, 2011). Substandard housing, education, social service, and economic opportunity linger despite possible police efforts. Without addressing these important issues, community policing is likely to have little effect.
The main criticism of community policing is the extent to which socially disorganized areas will be willing to work with law enforcement. The methods mentioned above have been shown to be extremely effective within communities that already display social cohesion and bonding. Where this cohesion is lacking or nonexistent are the areas most in need of community policing, however, cooperation levels are much more diminished. The perceived cause of this failure is due to the continued discounting of the conditions that originally allowed for these subcultures to persist (Lersch, 2011). Substandard housing, education, social service, and economic opportunity linger despite possible police efforts. Without addressing these important issues, community policing is likely to have little effect.