Community Policing and CompStat
Merged, or Mutually Exclusive?
The genesis of policing in the United States was entangled in politics, as politicians in large eastern cities were quick to appreciate the value of local influence over the police. In 1844, the New York legislature passed a law establishing a full-time police force for New York City. But the new police force was unlike anything that had existed in Europe. The New York City version was put under the control of the city government and city politicians. The American plan required that each ward in the city be a separate patrol district, unlike the European model, which divided the districts along the lines of criminal activity. The process for selecting officers was also different. The mayor chose the recruits from a list of names submitted by the aldermen and tax assessors of each ward; the mayor then submitted his choices to the city council for approval. This system gave most of the power over the police to the ward aldermen, who were seldom concerned with selecting the best people for the job. Instead, the system allowed and even encouraged political patronage and rewards for friends.
To be sure, there were benefits to having local political influence over the police: officers were integrated into neighborhoods, which helped to prevent and contain riots and helped immigrants establish themselves in communities and find jobs. But there were weaknesses as well: the intimacy with the community, the closeness to politicians, and the decentralized organizational structure (and its inability to provide supervision of officers) led to police corruption. The close identification of police with neighborhoods also resulted in discrimination against strangers, especially ethnic and racial minorities. Police officers often ruled their beats with the “end of their nightsticks” and practiced “curbside justice.” The lack of organizational control over officers also caused some inefficiencies and disorganization.
Reformers attempted to remove the police from this entrenchment in politics that prevailed from the 1840s to the 1930s. First were attempts to create civil service systems to eliminate patronage and ward influences from the hiring and firing of police officers. Also coming into play were the efforts of August Vollmer, a pioneer of police professionalism who rallied police executives around the idea of reform during the 1920s and 1930s. The belief that police officers should do more than merely arrest offenders, and that they should actively seek to prevent crime by “saving” potential or actual offenders, were important themes in police reform.