Enforcing The Law: Citizen's Role And Responsibility

Citizen involvement in law enforcement is not a new concept, with a rich history of vigilantism in the United States. While modern self-defence groups differ from classic vigilante groups in that they do not take the law into their own hands, they do raise issues with in-built trade-offs. For example, the lack of professional training among group members and the potential for antagonism between different sectors of the community. However, these groups may also contribute to a sense of self-worth and responsibility on the part of participants and give their communities a sense of pride and satisfaction in their ability to organise and help themselves.

Vigilantism

There are two types of vigilantism. The first appeared before 1856 in areas where settlement preceded effective law enforcement. This type of vigilantism was concerned with horse thieves, counterfeiters, outlaws, and badmen. The second type is more recent and involves self-defence groups that perform surveillance and protection of their own communities. These groups often work as an ancillary to the regular police, amplifying law enforcement through pursuit and capture.

The inclusion of citizens in law enforcement can have both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, it can contribute to a sense of self-worth and responsibility among participants and give the larger community pride and a sense of satisfaction in seeing the community organise to help itself. On the other hand, the lack of professional training among group members can be a concern, and the use of local residents to protect their own communities may sacrifice the ideal of the disinterested and even-handed peace officer.

Citizen involvement in law enforcement

There are two types of vigilantism. The first appeared prior to 1856 in areas where settlement preceded effective law enforcement. The concerns of this type of vigilantism were primarily horse thieves, counterfeiters, outlaws, and badmen. The enforcement, that is, of consensually formulated standards of peace and law.

Recent self-defence groups differ from more classic vigilante groups in that they, for the most part, have not killed or taken the law into their own hands. Instead, their primary functions have been the surveillance and protection of their own communities, often as an ancillary group to the regular police. They thus more closely resemble the early anti-horse-thief societies which amplified law enforcement through pursuit and capture, but did not try to substitute for it by administering summary punishments.

The enthusiasm of the group members is usually offset by their lack of professional training; the inclusion of some sectors of an urban community in law enforcement can antagonize other sectors; the use of local residents to protect their own communities may mean a sacrifice of the ideal of the disinterested and even-handed peace officer, but a gain in the ability to relate to the community in question.

Citizen participation in self-defence groups

Recent self-defence groups differ from classic vigilante groups in that they have not typically killed or taken the law into their own hands. Instead, their primary functions have been the surveillance and protection of their own communities, often as an ancillary group to the regular police. They thus more closely resemble the early anti-horse-thief societies which amplified law enforcement through pursuit and capture, but did not try to substitute for it by administering summary punishments.

Self-defence groups may be seen as a special form of the increasing demand for citizen participation in the planning, control, and delivery of the services which affect them. They can contribute to a sense of self-worth and responsibility on the part of participants and give members of the larger community pride and a sense of satisfaction in seeing the community organize to help itself.

However, there are also trade-offs to consider. The enthusiasm of group members is usually offset by their lack of professional training, and the inclusion of some sectors of an urban community in law enforcement can antagonize other sectors. The use of local residents to protect their own communities may mean a sacrifice of the ideal of the disinterested and even-handed peace officer, but it can also lead to a greater ability to relate to the community in question.

Furthermore, self-defence groups that operate street patrols may bring into direct contact, often without police mediation, populations whose mutual fears and prejudices are currently tempered by distance. While there seem to have been relatively fewer clashes between ethnic and racial groups, such groups today tend to be self-defence groups prepared for attack and violations from other groups, rather than using offensive attacks.

Citizen mobilisation

Recent self-defence groups have performed largely deterrent functions and have not usually held street trials or meted out alley justice. However, the fact that they have chosen to involve themselves as private citizens in police work has meant that the issue, if not the substance, of vigilantism has recurred with them.

The enthusiasm of the group members is usually offset by their lack of professional training; the inclusion of some sectors of an urban community in law enforcement can antagonise other sectors; the use of local residents to protect their own communities may mean a sacrifice of the ideal of the disinterested and even-handed peace officer, but a gain in the ability to relate to the community in question.

Whatever their objective consequences, some of the groups may also contribute to a sense of self-worth and responsibility on the part of participants and may give members of the larger, often somewhat anomic and disorganized communities they wish to serve, pride and a sense of satisfaction in seeing the community organise to help itself.

Prosecutorial discretion

Citizen involvement in law enforcement is not new to the American scene. There have been at least 326 vigilante movements during the past two centuries of American history. However, recent self-defence groups differ from classic vigilante groups in that they have not killed or taken the law into their own hands. Instead, their primary functions have been the surveillance and protection of their own communities, often as an ancillary group to the regular police.

The United States Supreme Court plays a significant role in shaping prosecutorial discretion. Its decisions establish guidelines for prosecutors, emphasising the importance of fairness, ethics, and the broader goals of the evolving criminal justice system. The courts also act as a check on the prosecution's power and ensure compliance with the Constitution.

Frequently asked questions