Is their objective just to reduce crime?
Does any organisation have a goal of wiping out organised crime?
I would be interested in what these organisations really have as stated goals.
If you are talking about the ‘ultimate’ goal, I’m guessing that it is to eradicate crime entirely.
If you are focussing on realistic goals, then I doubt you’d get an answer from a senior copper because anything under the ultimate would be considered shortchanging the objectives etc etc
I’m also interested in any stated goals that various police agencies may have.
When I first learned the US Army’s stated mission was “To prevent war and, if necessary, win in combat”, I was underwhelmed. But it seems that it can be interpreted to describe all that the Army does if you stretch it a bit.
Law enforcement, on the other hand, seems to hinge on something narrower than “reducing crime”, or even “justice”, especially since much of the responsibility of achieving that goal would fall on the legislative and judicial branches of the local governments.
Maybe something like “deter crime and, if necessary, bring suspects before a trial to be judged”? I don’t know where parking tickets would fit into this though.
Police motto to protect and to serve.
From the FBI’s website:
Something broader, I should think. Why did all those NY police rush into the Twin Towers on 9/11? To arrest people? Gather evidence? No, to get people out – because the police are not purely and simply crimefighters or officers of the law; they are also generally responsible for public peace, public order, and public safety.
Most organizations have a built-in incentive to expand their scope and reach in the world. I don’t see where law enforcement is any different from the others in this respect, whatever their STATED goals are.
What I was going to say. Increase budget, personnel, and responsibilities.
Very good point, sir. I forgot about all the saving people’s lives stuff.
Still, how much of what the police did on 9/11 was in their job descriptions, and how much was going above and beyond the call of duty?
I would think that in non-catastrophic-world-shattering events that paramedics and the fire department could handle most of the life-saving that didn’t fall under the category of ‘preventing murder’.
The mission statement of my hometown police department:
“The mission of the [hometown] Police Department, through the philosophy of community oriented policing, is to create a safe community where all people can live in peace without the fear of crime. This commitment will ensure a professional quality of service and accountability to the citizens of the city of [hometown].”
Their goal is to make as many high profile arrests as possible and not get hurt while doing so. Promotions, better budgets and retirement ensues.
Their goal is to grind down the working classes while serving the parasitic needs of the decadent aristocracy! They’re the fuzz on the face of fascism![sup]*[/sup] Off the pigs!
[sup]*[/sup] Tom Sharpe, Ancestral Vices (1980)
I’ve never worked directly with a law enforcement organization, but I have to assume that they do not have an “ultimate goal” I don’t even think the police set their overall goals. I believe those are actually set by politicians and policy makers.
They may create short term objectives. “Focus on these 10 most wanted fugitives”, “set up a servailance in the park to catch drug dealers and prostitutes”, “lets improve response time by 30%”.
In management consulting, there’s a thing called the 80:20 rule. Basically 20% of your resources will fix 80% of the problem but the remaining 20% will require the other 80% of resources. You can’t say “we’re going to erradicate 100% of crime”. First of all it will be exhorbitantly expensive to do so, it is IMPOSSIBLE to do so because crime is caused by a variety of complex social factors outside the control of the police and finally, attempting to do so will likely create such an oppressive state as to incite more rebellion and crime.