{UAH} I like KK but I think a military General should not lead the police
|
3:16 AM |
No comments |
Guys,
I like KK but I think a military General should not lead the police. First the army is trained to decimate the enemy; their mindset is the 'us against them' mentality. They are operational (in military terms combative) all the time. They have no time to appeal to reason. Its orders and nothing else. Secondly, soldiers are by their own nature secluded into barracks. Their lives are seclusive.
The Police on the other hand is trained to detect and prevent crime first and when crimes occur investigate and take them to court for adjudication. In some countries they are call COPs meaning Citizens on Patrol. They are part and partial of the communities they police. The concept of community policing is predicated on the inherent police civilian relation; an important partnership for a successful democratic policing.
As is the case today, the mentality of the IGP (operational and militaristic) permeates every level of the police. Although many career and professional policemen and women privately express rejection of this method of work, they are unafraid to say so publicly for fear of losing their jobs or being severely reprimanded. It is therefore little wonder that police chiefs, as the one in my previous post, make no effort in hiding their military attire when addressing the press and parading suspects to the press. The newly passed out cadets manifest this mentality more than any career police officers i have met at police stations.
Democratic policing is doom if the police loose public good will. Community policing premised on a military, take order rather than meaningfully engage with reason, is bound to remain a hallow promise. By extension, criminal justice, which is hugely reliant on an effective police investigation, will grind to an embarrassing halt. Prisons will be overcrowded with suspects, who each time they appear in court, will be told by the helpless prosecutors that investigation in their matter is still on-going or incomplete.
The inapplicability of military thinking to civil government is all too evident in Uganda's history. Samuel Huntington [Clash of Civilizations] argues that officers tend to believe that politics is simply a question of issuing the right orders seemingly unbeknownst to the fact that no regime, civil or military, can succeed by micro-management. He said "governments succeed by devolving power and allowing decisions to be taken as closely as possible to the people they affect. Armies obviously can't function on this basis, and find it hard to adapt their mentality to the complexity of modern administration". The police anywhere in the world can't be effective devoid of the civilian participation, partnership and cooperation.
--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
I like KK but I think a military General should not lead the police. First the army is trained to decimate the enemy; their mindset is the 'us against them' mentality. They are operational (in military terms combative) all the time. They have no time to appeal to reason. Its orders and nothing else. Secondly, soldiers are by their own nature secluded into barracks. Their lives are seclusive.
The Police on the other hand is trained to detect and prevent crime first and when crimes occur investigate and take them to court for adjudication. In some countries they are call COPs meaning Citizens on Patrol. They are part and partial of the communities they police. The concept of community policing is predicated on the inherent police civilian relation; an important partnership for a successful democratic policing.
As is the case today, the mentality of the IGP (operational and militaristic) permeates every level of the police. Although many career and professional policemen and women privately express rejection of this method of work, they are unafraid to say so publicly for fear of losing their jobs or being severely reprimanded. It is therefore little wonder that police chiefs, as the one in my previous post, make no effort in hiding their military attire when addressing the press and parading suspects to the press. The newly passed out cadets manifest this mentality more than any career police officers i have met at police stations.
Democratic policing is doom if the police loose public good will. Community policing premised on a military, take order rather than meaningfully engage with reason, is bound to remain a hallow promise. By extension, criminal justice, which is hugely reliant on an effective police investigation, will grind to an embarrassing halt. Prisons will be overcrowded with suspects, who each time they appear in court, will be told by the helpless prosecutors that investigation in their matter is still on-going or incomplete.
The inapplicability of military thinking to civil government is all too evident in Uganda's history. Samuel Huntington [Clash of Civilizations] argues that officers tend to believe that politics is simply a question of issuing the right orders seemingly unbeknownst to the fact that no regime, civil or military, can succeed by micro-management. He said "governments succeed by devolving power and allowing decisions to be taken as closely as possible to the people they affect. Armies obviously can't function on this basis, and find it hard to adapt their mentality to the complexity of modern administration". The police anywhere in the world can't be effective devoid of the civilian participation, partnership and cooperation.
--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
0 comments:
Post a Comment