A very interesting read from The GOA
- Thread starter Wildcard
- Start date
Quite a bit to read there.
Assuming that the author is asking simply whether or not police officers are constitutional, it seems to me the founding fathers and all their original literature couldn't possibly comprehend the state of affairs modern America finds itself in.
"At the time of the Constitution's ratification, the office of sheriff was an appointed position, and constables were either elected or drafted from the community to serve without pay.5 Most of their duties involved civil executions rather than criminal law enforcement."
Of course nowadays you can't possibly expect anyone to do such a dangerous job for free. And cities have grown so big that of course more sherriffs are needed. Just look at LA.
"Professional police as we know them today originated in American cities during the second quarter of the nineteenth century, when municipal governments drafted citizens to maintain order.6 The role of these "nightly watch" officers gradually grew to encompass the catching of criminals, which had formerly been the responsibility of individual citizens.7"
Nowadays when the everyday citizen takes the law into his own hands, it's considered vigilanteism and they are sometimes frowned upon. Let alone the consideration that the general populace including today's youths don't have the responsibility or the maturity to perform such acts without it turning into a riot or street justice.
To sum it up, the past is the past. There is no way the founding fathers could forsee the amount of crime or problems we face today as a country. Back then rape alone was rare and met with extreme punishments when it occurred. And not necessarily to the truly guilty party. Regardless, in this case, what the founding fathers intended, in today's society police officers are constitutional and very much needed. Just imagine what life would be like without them.
Assuming that the author is asking simply whether or not police officers are constitutional, it seems to me the founding fathers and all their original literature couldn't possibly comprehend the state of affairs modern America finds itself in.
"At the time of the Constitution's ratification, the office of sheriff was an appointed position, and constables were either elected or drafted from the community to serve without pay.5 Most of their duties involved civil executions rather than criminal law enforcement."
Of course nowadays you can't possibly expect anyone to do such a dangerous job for free. And cities have grown so big that of course more sherriffs are needed. Just look at LA.
"Professional police as we know them today originated in American cities during the second quarter of the nineteenth century, when municipal governments drafted citizens to maintain order.6 The role of these "nightly watch" officers gradually grew to encompass the catching of criminals, which had formerly been the responsibility of individual citizens.7"
Nowadays when the everyday citizen takes the law into his own hands, it's considered vigilanteism and they are sometimes frowned upon. Let alone the consideration that the general populace including today's youths don't have the responsibility or the maturity to perform such acts without it turning into a riot or street justice.
To sum it up, the past is the past. There is no way the founding fathers could forsee the amount of crime or problems we face today as a country. Back then rape alone was rare and met with extreme punishments when it occurred. And not necessarily to the truly guilty party. Regardless, in this case, what the founding fathers intended, in today's society police officers are constitutional and very much needed. Just imagine what life would be like without them.
I think we would get along just fine without official police. People would either defend their own neighborhoods part-time, or they would create their own private community police forces, which would arrest (most states still grant citizens the power to conduct arrests for non-trivial crimes) and deliver criminals to the courts.
The idea that murderers and rapists and burglars would have free rein in the absence of police is, I think, fiction propogated by those who for some reason want us to have the equivalent of Plato's guardians. Thieving and other more minor crimes might not be dealt with very effectively without police, but neither are they dealt with very effectively now. The clearance rates for minor crimes are terrible; unfortunately only habitual or stupid offenders are likely to ever get caught.
The idea that murderers and rapists and burglars would have free rein in the absence of police is, I think, fiction propogated by those who for some reason want us to have the equivalent of Plato's guardians. Thieving and other more minor crimes might not be dealt with very effectively without police, but neither are they dealt with very effectively now. The clearance rates for minor crimes are terrible; unfortunately only habitual or stupid offenders are likely to ever get caught.
Wildcard I was not implying you were the original author. I was just saying that whoever wrote the article, my response was based on the assumtion that they were asking a simple question rather than stating their opinions on police.
Tyme,
Although I do like the idea of citizens getting involved in the arrest of criminals, I don't think it would work out at all. If society indeed did away with official police, the justice system and courts would not change. They would still need hard, accurate evidence to try the criminals brought in by citizens. As well as the mountain of paperwork that goes with each arrest. I don't think that most people would take the time out of their lives to collect as much evidence as needed, in a professional and legal way, do all the paperwork and reports needed to validate facts and claims, and still go about their daily lives of work and play.
Tyme,
Although I do like the idea of citizens getting involved in the arrest of criminals, I don't think it would work out at all. If society indeed did away with official police, the justice system and courts would not change. They would still need hard, accurate evidence to try the criminals brought in by citizens. As well as the mountain of paperwork that goes with each arrest. I don't think that most people would take the time out of their lives to collect as much evidence as needed, in a professional and legal way, do all the paperwork and reports needed to validate facts and claims, and still go about their daily lives of work and play.