Achieving a balance between individual rights and personal freedoms with crime control
To some extent we can achieve the goal of our criminal justice system hinges on equity as well as fairness. It can be done if we have support for reasonable policies through more prominent transparency and responsibility, which will prompt more secure groups. It can be achieved through supporting community policies as an approach to renewing connections between law enforcers and the community they serve (Dimitrakopoulos, & Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2016). Also, finish up programs that put military weapons in the hands of nearby police, also, urge police powers to cease utilizing this gear. Advocating for social competency requiring for police to ensure a better understanding between policing the individuals from the society where they work can also be employed to achieve the goals. Working to fight factors that lead to the mass action in the community is also a critical factor that needs to be emphasized on (Dimitrakopoulos, & Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2016). If the above-mentioned issues are in the position, one can comfortably say that a balance between maintaining individual rights and personal freedoms with crime control has been obtained by law enforcers in the community.
Criminal model vs. due process model
The crime control and due process models of our criminal justice system cannot bring about efficiency and effectiveness in criminal justice system despite having the same goal that necessitates it to enforce the law and maintain social order together with protecting the citizens from any injustice. My concerns are based on the argument by the liberal proponent of the due process model that the criminal control model is harsher as well as pursue the ideology of a police state. In contrary, some of the conservatives in support for the criminal control model argue that the due process model protects lawbreakers at the expense of law-abiding citizens who are innocent. To add some critics have it that the crime control model is the most significant function of the criminal justice system when it comes to suppressing criminal act while the due process just looks into the imperfection of the whole process (Haerens, 2013). However balancing the same is difficult to achieve although it is necessary to achieve the goals. Conversely, all over the world, such a balance cannot be achieved since crime control suppresses due process value due to the mutual legal assistance treaties that regulate foreign evidence gathering on the side of the prosecutor and blocks the defendant from accessing the same process. Therefore to ensure harmony between due process and crime control we need to have the framework that supports both two aspects of criminal justice system.
The Court’s decisions affect the criminal justice system
I disagree with this opinion since in most cases the citizens have a strong feeling about criminal activity and judges play a vital role in ensuring there is criminal justice when it comes to sentencing. Considerably, criminal cases are taken to court after the decision has been made by the prosecutor to indict someone of the alleged crime, and in most cases, the judge ensure that evidence is placed before the court after that make a decision on innocence or guilt upon the person indicted (Haerens, 2013). In a serious case, the judge can hear evidence then decide to involve a jury trial. Although judges have the power to imprison those who were convicted of any crime, in case the crime is more serious though he might decide to consider other options such as community punishment or a given kind of restriction. Furthermore, punishment is not the only consideration when a judge is making consideration but looking at the impact of the particular sentence may reduce the chances of that crime taking place in the society. Therefore, It is not applicable that the decision made by the Supreme Court judge or any judge can be compromised by any political influence since their decision is typically based on the evidenced prevailed in the law court and are supported by law.
Types of sentence
The sentence is a punishment for any indicted defendants in court and the prescribed punishment can found in both state as well as federal statutes. However, there are limits to the severity of punishment as placed by the Eighth Amendment. The most effective being the death penalty that is reserved for those who commit first degree of murder under the aggravating circumstance though it gives the defendants the right to plea as well as the right to free from arbitrary together with the capricious imposition of death penalty. So it gives a limit to the discretion of the judge or jury to sentence only if the evidenced prevailed capture an act of aggravating situation and also magnate for a two-part proceeding as well as provision for automatic review by an appellate court. It is a safeguard to ensure proper arbitrary application of death penalty is undertaken. The least effective sentence on my view is jail since it is a short-term lock up before the inmate is convicted of any felony. To some extent, it denies justice since it gives the defendant an opportunity to get bail with minimal freedom hence the impact of crime can still be felt among individual that leave in the society at that particular time.
Probation, parole, and community corrections effects
Probation, parole as well as community service correction were formulated to assist in reducing the population on imprisoners by providing an opportunity to less committed crimes to serve their sentence away from prison. The idea was to ensure efficiency in the correction system and was deemed critical. To some extent, it is demeaning since it incurs some cost to ensure that probationers are supervised as they carry out their probation and the same time incur some cost to hold inmates in prison. It is making the act more expensive rather than having many people in prison. On some scenarios those who are put on probation or parole end up committing more crime since they are idle and jobless hence re-arrested and imprisoned. Therefore, it is not in good faith to have this kind of correction since it does not work effectively on discouraging or correcting crime at any given moment in the society but leads to a build-up of criminal activities. Finally, on a flip side, it allows many offenders to get away with multiple of violation without sanction since it gives a leeway to crime until it gets to a tipping point.
Use of technology by law enforcement officers
Technology is so fundamental in ensuring that criminal justice is achieved in the society. It is true that use of body cameras help the law enforcement officers if an incident should occur. It prevails from the study that has been conducted across many states. These studies reveal that those police officers were more cautious and risk-averse whenever they put on the body cameras. It has led to less arrest as well as few stop and frisk operations since the police officer more concern is criminal procedure and policy. Furthermore, it opens up police operation for scrutiny by supervisors and the public. Some the studies have also revealed that officers were able to write citations since they feared being reprimanded for not issuing tickets in scenarios that the civilians had violated the traffic laws. However, there is much opposition since it only the police executive that is in support, but the junior feel that the use of cameras might subdue their field operation. To wider view, the use of the camera on police uniform shall be more effective for the department to achieve the goals of criminal justice system.
Community policing against the terror attack
Community policing was based on the fact that civilians get empowerment towards prevention of crime or any problem that can lead to crime. The major goal was to establishing and maintaining trust since it enabled access to valuable community information by the law enforcers hence preventing crime. So to prevent local terror attacks, the police should form a partnership by providing a framework of engaging civilians to assist in identification of possible terrorist attacks in the locality. To some extent this policy is not effective in fighting the local terror attacks since community policing not only mean a partnership with the civilians but also require the interagency as well as intergovernmental collaborations with federal and state agencies through the exchange as well as the collection of intelligence, sharing of resources during the attacks. If this achieved then, community policing would be the most appropriate tool in fighting terror attacks in our locality since before the inception of the policy terror attack prevention was hindered by decentralization of responsibility together with lateral communication.
In my law enforcement career adhering to the law and policy set under the criminal justice is paramount. To do so, I must have an understanding of all the aspect that makes it appropriate to enact my role with ease and confidence. So this course has given me the skill and necessary guidelines to execute my responsibility as a law enforcement officer. This course is of much help in ensuring that I am well equipped and molded with all the aspect of my professionalism since it provides an in-depth about the criminal justice system and its functions at large. Therefore, it makes my capability to operate by the stipulated laws and policy coupled with my decision and critical analysis of all the scenarios at hand.
Dimitrakopoulos, I. G., & Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. (2016). Individual rights and liberties under the U.S. Constitution: The case law of the U.S. Supreme Court. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.
Haerens, M. (2013). The U.S. Supreme Court. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.