High qualification is not the principal requirement. Since police are a force directly interacting with public in all walks of life, the police enrolled as envisaged by the makers of the law are to be more worldly wise. Ordinarily police work involves criminal acts and the investigation process is a very upsetting process, which mostly cannot be stomached by the educated elite. Further police are paid by the state government and are not paid what could be earned by the educated in this money conscious world. More than formal education about mathematics, computers, science I would think that just the stamp of a degree is not the optimum requirement. It would be instructional courses in sociology and tending to philosophy of criminal and mass action, and further on ethics. These courses should be by way of continuing mandatory discourses to be attended and tests to be completed to attain any rise in pay or their next rank. So highly qualified policemen is not possible considering the scope of their work, and their pay and allowances, but within this framework it is possible, if interest be taken in this aspect by the government, to educate them directly into their own field work. This is a must. Otherwise we will always know of the police as a force playing on the fears of the public and making money; more money; and plenty more money.
2007-01-17 18:46:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Kool-kat 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
In a true democracy, there would be little or no need for police and giving one man power over another would actually violate the definition of democracy.
That being said, as a necessary evil, Yes they should be highly qualified.
They should not only be more aware of the laws and have a higher moral desire not to violate laws or harm their fellow man, they should also be held to a higher moral standard.
With current american law, they are not only allowed if not encouraged to break many laws, they are held to a LOWER standard while being provided super-citizen rights of excessive protection through legal classification (the killing of a policeman is a capital crime where the abduction, rape, and murder of an innocent school girl is not). Immunity from prosecution for certain murders. legal right to carry and use a firearm where ever and when ever they see fit. The list unfortunately goes on. In localities where a zero tolerance policy for police corruption or violation of law is upheld, the local crime rate GOES DOWN. This is possibly by providing an example of the behavior which should be accepted by and expected of all members of society.
2007-01-18 13:16:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Truth be Told 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Highly qualifed person will treat the crowd with some respect and on the other hand the normal policeman will do it his way which is what required for normal citizen who is intelligent enough to find an easy excuse to break the law. The less educated person use to have much of practical mind and so they are able to handle the situation more practically. Changing the system will not bring any good to the politicians so it's never going to happen.
2007-01-17 02:47:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by ashutosh ddn 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
What democracy are you referring to? The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic. The only nation, that I'm aware of that leans toward Democracy is Switzerland being that they allow citizens the right to vote directly on public policy proposals.
The propaganda machine, known to most as the media/news, uses the word Democracy - as do many of our political leaders, however the misuse of a word alone hardly means it is true. A Constitutional Republic is a government based on a Constitution that elects Representative and delegates the political decisionmaking to those Representatives. A Democracy is a government in which ordinary citizens have the opportunity to vote directly on all public policy decisions if they so choose.
Having made clear the distinctions here I will agree that setting the bar so low for our public officials, at any level, does tend to demean the system. However, who's fault is this? The public has a right to demand more instead of only whine about whatever "problem" they see.
Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. What are you doing, in your community, to raise the bar? How many doors have you knocked on? How many petition signatures have you gathered? How many other citizens have you gotten onboard with whatever proposal(s) you have?
2007-01-17 02:25:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, in most countries, the 'defense' budget is obscenely high. They will allocate only a penny or two to maintain law and order. Especially with regards to your country, the pay is relatively low, the risks high and the respect negligible. So they decided to lower the qualification standards. I have no quarrels with low qualifications, when there is comprehensive training to make up for it. I think that the only things that are near impossible to train are values. The potential officers must therefore be thoroughly screened with regards to their beliefs and value systems.
Competence can be learned. Values are often for life. An effective and firm, yet compassionate and just police force will go very far in ensuring the future of a nation, and keeping the horrors of police brutality, corruption and prejudice away.
2007-01-17 02:31:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by norman steve 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
u are correct. like doctors ,engineers and MBA's separate courses with taylor made curriculam to be designed to suit the needs at the higher education level which should include papers such as crime , forensic, law, inclusive latest technologies with specific interest on moral values
2007-01-21 01:22:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by sri ram m 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
except the very old (about to retire) , presently most persons in police are satisfactory qualified ; and ; upper ranks (above DSP) are highly qualified (almost equal to IAS).
so if we see rank wise , they are qualified for the position held by them except a few exceptions.
2007-01-17 02:56:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mother first (friend next).........my children are the most important things in my life!!! my role as a mother will always come first!!
2016-05-23 23:57:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I totally agree.
2007-01-17 02:16:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Shut up and put your arms out where I can see your hands. Do it, NOW!!!
2007-01-17 02:17:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by husemanw 1
·
3⤊
0⤋