Must equal to 1,500 words or more with  intext citation and at least 3 scholarly sources

1. List and explain the meaning of the twelve standards of policing proposed by Robert Peel. Explain why each of these principles is still important today.

2. Review the changes in policing that occurred as a result of the reforms advocated by August Vollmer. How do these changes compare to the principles of Community Policing (see Chapters 5 and 6), CompStat, and PEPPAS?

3. Review Wilson's three operational styles and the four major functions of police departments. Is a particular style best suited to a particular function? Is more than one style appropriate for a particular function? Explain.

4. Review the Law Enforcement Officer Code of Ethics in Figure 6.1 on page 183. Which three Canons are the most important and why?

You are the commander of the operations division of a medium-sized police department, in charge of the patrol, criminal investigation, and traffic sections.

5. a. What would you do if several officers from each of the sections came to you and said that they believed that job stress was hindering officer performance and endangering the health of several officers in each of the units?

6.b. How would you go about validating their claims of job stress in the work environment?

7. c. If it were determined that stressors such as too frequent shift changes, poor communication among the various ranks, and a lack of sufficient safety equipment were present, what would be your plan to improve working conditions and reduce job stress?

8. d. Provide a step-by-step summary of what you would do. 

Reply to Gibson post 100 words listed below.

just as there are two sides to every story, there are two sides to the issue of stop and frisk policing. Racial tensions have certainly intensified in the last couple of years, especially with the election of our current President. The racial divide in our country has been incredibly disheartening and disappointing. Shouldn't we be improving in the area of tolerance and acceptance, instead of taking a giant step backwards? I personally, can see the positives and negatives on both sides of the subject of stop and frisk policing. On one hand, I do believe that rights are being violated and that there are certain prejudices and racial profiling involved in the practice (Boyette & Martinez, 2013). The numbers of unarmed black men suffering at the hands of various police officers is very upsetting. On the other hand, many officers are afraid to be proactive in certain situations for fear of losing their job or being viewed as discriminatory (Finn, 2017). I do not think this is a cut and dry issue. We as a country, are in the midst of a confusing, frustrating, and discouraging moral battle. Each side passionately believes they are correct and are constantly butting heads with one another. At this point I’m unsure of what to think about the court’s ruling, as I do think that the practice is discriminatory, but I also think that stop and frisk policing does increase productivity of officers and in effect, lower crime (Odom, 2015). I think that the agreement between the ACLU and the Chicago Police Department has been a “victory for minorities,” but has unfortunately contributed to the spike in crime in the city (Finn, 2017). At this point, I believe I am on the middle of the fence on the subject, because I can see both the positives and negatives to stop and frisk policing.

Reply to dave 100 words listed below

The Fourth Amendment Is a part of the Bill of Rights which guarantee the privacy of all citizens and protects everyone from illegal search and seizures. (Smentkowski,2010). The New York Police Department’s policy, in my opinion, violates the Constitution. I understand the entire state is “shell-shocked” from the horrible terrorist events that happened on September 11, 2001. However, the policy only hinders law abiding citizens and violates their constitutional right. As a police officer, we are giving powers to uphold laws. However, there are a few officers that push that line to the limit and abuse the powers they have. In this case, members of NYPD were abusing their powers and targeting mostly minorities. Because of this policy, in 70 precincts, over half of all the reported cases where the stop and question tactic are used over half of the cases were with black and Hispanic males. (Milner, 2016) Given the practice, I do not think this policy reduces crime. I think it increases the crime rate especially assaults on officers and stop, halt, frisk. My reason for my thoughts is because I can see the “bad guy” having or potentially having an encounter with the police and them trying to get away from the officers.

I do not think the pullback of the Chicago Police Department stop and frisk practices are the cause of the spike in the murder rate. According to the Chicago Tribune, CPD entered into an agreement with the ACLU and from that agreement the pullback happened. (Gorner,2017) The withdrawal is a result of officers seeing the spike in crime and deciding not to engage subject that might cause a potential conflict in between them and injuring, killing, or ending the career of the officer because of the agreement. (Gorner,2017)

As a police officer, my stance on the stop and frisk by police officers is clear. You can not violate someone’s constitutional right just because you deem them “suspicious.” Even though I understand NYPD’s position on why they put the practice to policy, it still is illegal if the contact is not warranted by anything other than the color of someone skin. Terry Versus Ohio is clear and should be followed, and it should be done without any political influence or bias from anyone.