PDA

View Full Version : Federalization of Local LE



FlyChicaga
01-04-2011, 12:07 PM
I just saw this article on PoliceOne.com:

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/3139476-The-federalization-of-local-law-enforcement/

Any thoughts from LEOs on this? Do you think it would be a good or bad idea to federalize local departments? Do you think it would be better to have a national "Federal Police Service" of sorts, or just create a national standards requirement that all departments would need to abide by? Do you think it would be better for smaller communities in terms of funding, or would funding get cut hard since some "better off" communities would suddenly have a level playing field for federal funds with communities that don't have access to money?

LA DEP
01-04-2011, 12:11 PM
The citizens in this country will never tolerate a national police force, nor should they.

I would retire about one microsecond after one was formed.

This isnt Russia, North Korea, or 1930s Germany.

Cyber_Saint
01-04-2011, 02:00 PM
People like having police that respond and answer to the local communities that pay them. That would not be the case with a federalized police force. I don't see anything wrong with the system that we currently have.

just joe
01-04-2011, 02:04 PM
I don't use the search function much, but this topic as been discussed a number of times.

No, I don't think it would work, nor do I think it is something most Americans want.

Dingo990
01-04-2011, 02:40 PM
Our country is too diverse for the federal government to take over something as community specific as law enforcement. I don't trust the feds to realize there is a difference between policing in small town Missouri and Boston for example. Not to mention, I think as a whole citizens like having law enforcement that are accountable to a community.

As for national standards. I don't really think it's the feds business to begin with to be getting involved in an issue that is clearly a state issue.

DAL
01-04-2011, 02:42 PM
The federal government is even more cumbersome and bureaucratic. Having it run local law-enforcement would be a disaster.

PhilipCal
01-04-2011, 02:58 PM
Local control of law enforcement is an American tradition. Sure, it has it's faults, but Federal control would be far worse than any problems local control might have. Don't believe we need the likes of Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, et al, running anything more than they do. I agree totally with the prior posts of my colleagues. We don't need it.

NYCDep
01-04-2011, 05:58 PM
Just reading through various discussions on this board, police work can be very different depending on where you work. A federal cookie cutter approach would create more problems than it would solve.

QuietPro
01-04-2011, 06:48 PM
I also agree with my brothers and sisters. Individual departments are not only a tradition, but also a sort of localized "check" on the Federal Government. A "United States Police Force" .......?

Yep, I've seen it....on Escape From New York; a movie about an American Police-State. Ring a bell, anyone?

I'd never work for such an agency; and I'd be weary of the Fed. government /taxing/regulating/ordering me far more than I already am now.....which is too much.

Kimble
01-04-2011, 08:11 PM
I've been a local cop and a federal one, and regardless of whether you're a fan of bigger government or not, no one does a better job of taking the community than local cops who not only live in the community but work for it.

HoodCop
01-05-2011, 12:04 AM
Im a believer that every state should just have a state Police. Its annoying how every interprets the laws there own way. I believe the entire state should do it one one across the board.

But im against the Feds taking over.

creolecop
01-05-2011, 12:46 AM
That is 1,000% AGAINST Federalism which is what this country was founded on to prevent dictatorship among other principles we are against.

The Wild Turkey
01-05-2011, 04:11 AM
Australian copper here. Here all our police forces are state based with authorised strengths numbering in the thousands (mine, NSW Police Force has in the order of 15 000 sworn officers), so it always puzzles me when I hear about every local community in the US having their own police force, some with only a handful of officers. How do you manage to deliver the full range of policing services to your community in those cases?

Dingo990
01-05-2011, 05:26 AM
How do you manage to deliver the full range of policing services to your community in those cases?

Usually with the assistance of outside agencies, in my part of the country it is usually the county, but sometimes the state. Our Sheriff's Office has tons of resources to help us if we need them. We have a couple smaller cities that surround us, we generally offer a hand if they need it and they sometimes do the same for us.

It might seem overly complex, but it works. Citizens have a police department that are accountable to them on a local level and there are usually resources necessary to get the job done.

I would argue that under your system, a city of 1,500 citizens might be overlooked by your agency. You might respond to calls, but I doubt you have a station close to every community and I doubt they are benefiting from your resources the same as the biggest city in your jurisidiction. Here in the US, if that city chose to, they could form a PD of few officers (probably 3-7) and take care of most needs.

BigSky
01-05-2011, 05:32 AM
I just saw this article on PoliceOne.com:

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/3139476-The-federalization-of-local-law-enforcement/

Any thoughts from LEOs on this? Do you think it would be a good or bad idea to federalize local departments? Do you think it would be better to have a national "Federal Police Service" of sorts, or just create a national standards requirement that all departments would need to abide by? Do you think it would be better for smaller communities in terms of funding, or would funding get cut hard since some "better off" communities would suddenly have a level playing field for federal funds with communities that don't have access to money?

Brilliant Idea! Ach Bien Deutchland!

Seriously? The dumbest idea EVER! EVER! Not only that, but the US Constitution would have to be rewritten.

The Wild Turkey
01-05-2011, 07:43 AM
Usually with the assistance of outside agencies, in my part of the country it is usually the county, but sometimes the state. Our Sheriff's Office has tons of resources to help us if we need them. We have a couple smaller cities that surround us, we generally offer a hand if they need it and they sometimes do the same for us.

It might seem overly complex, but it works. Citizens have a police department that are accountable to them on a local level and there are usually resources necessary to get the job done.

Ok, I can see how that might work, and yes it does seem overly complex. Surely with so many different agencies operating in the one area there would be some inevitable duplication of resources?


I would argue that under your system, a city of 1,500 citizens might be overlooked by your agency. You might respond to calls, but I doubt you have a station close to every community and I doubt th[quote]ey are benefiting from your resources the same as the biggest city in your jurisidiction. Here in the US, if that city chose to, they could form a PD of few officers (probably 3-7) and take care of most needs.

Well, here most towns that size would have what we call a one man station, that is a sub station belonging to the local area command, but which is only staffed by a single officer who resides in a residence behind the station. Certainly not my cup of tea (I like being able to go home and switch off), and there are times when it's not ideal, but for the most part its worked to date.

SinePari
01-05-2011, 08:05 AM
Did anybody read the article? The author in no way advocates a national police force. He is simply stating that the purse strings, oversight committees, and a standardization process is a defacto control mechanism by the US Government, and is making local law enforcement codependent upon federal money for survival.

Kimble
01-05-2011, 02:46 PM
Did anybody read the article? The author in no way advocates a national police force. He is simply stating that the purse strings, oversight committees, and a standardization process is a defacto control mechanism by the US Government, and is making local law enforcement codependent upon federal money for survival.

I can believe that. Just look at any number of local PD's in CA (as well as across the US) that went belly up when the economy went south and federal dollars weren't flowing in as steadily.

Neverwas..
01-05-2011, 03:00 PM
I just saw this article on PoliceOne.com:

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/3139476-The-federalization-of-local-law-enforcement/

Any thoughts from LEOs on this? Do you think it would be a good or bad idea to federalize local departments? Do you think it would be better to have a national "Federal Police Service" of sorts, or just create a national standards requirement that all departments would need to abide by? Do you think it would be better for smaller communities in terms of funding, or would funding get cut hard since some "better off" communities would suddenly have a level playing field for federal funds with communities that don't have access to money?

i see the Danger here and it is a Big Concern..

Sleuth
01-06-2011, 03:27 PM
I am a Retired Fed, and I am dead set against even the degree of federalism seen today. Remember, the Federal Government takes your money (taxes), subtracts what they want to run the bureaucracy, and then send some of it back. But you may pay in $1,000, have $400 taken for the bureaucrats, and get $100 back as a "Grant". The other $500? That went to folks who paid in less, or even nothing. So don't think of grants as "free money"!

Nope, collect my money here, and give it direct to the SO. Then I get to vote for or against the Sheriff depending on how he operates his department.