Running head: POLICE DISCRETION
Police Discretion
Cody Crossley
Salt Lake Community College
1

POLICE DISCRETION
Police Discretion
Police Discretion is defined as the power to decide what kind of offense has been committed, how serious the offense is, and whether or not the offense deserves an arrest or a warning (More, 1975). Arcuri, Gunn, and Lester (1979) further describe police discretion as
2 when to act and how to act. This means that police officers on the job decide on a daily basis whether to uphold all of the laws or let some of the minor offenses off with a warning. Police discretion is a very important part of police work. This paper will look at the necessity of police discretion, the ethics behind its use, and ways to train officers to be more effective while using discretion.
Police Discretion, Law and Public Safety
In the United States, laws were written to protect the public. Laws keep the public safe from serious offenses like murder and assault. Laws also protect our personal property and our freedoms. Finally, there are also many laws that promote safety and public order such as traffic laws, littering, and much more. Not all of these laws are equal. Police resources are limited and police officers need to decide every day how they are going to enforce laws. If they spend all of their time on minor offenses, then it might affect their ability to deal with some of the major offenses. This is where discretion comes in. Police officers have the ability to overlook some minor offences and focus on the more serious crimes. This allows the public to be safe from bodily harm, loss of personal possessions, and loss of their freedoms. Focusing on the serious crimes helps keep the public safe because it puts the most dangerous people in jail and keeps them away from the public (Arcuri, Gunn, & Lester, 1979). However, this discretion power puts a lot of pressure on the police to have very little error in their judgment. They need to decide

POLICE DISCRETION 3 quickly whether it is a serious offense that poses a danger to others, or if it is a minor offense that won’t harm anyone or anything.
By making decision everyday on who to arrest and which minor laws to enforce, the police also have an impact on the court system. For every arrest they make, or ticket they issue, the courts have to process it or deal with it. This makes the courts very busy. One hears daily about court cases that take months or even years to be resolved because the courts are overwhelmed with a ton of minor cases. Police discretion has a huge part in this. If the police choose to enforce every single law, then the courts would be absolutely overcome with cases.
However, it is important to enforce laws that promote public safety, and to discourage crime. If officers don’t enforce laws generally, then there is no deterrent to crime. An important part of police discretion is a balance between enforcing laws to protect public safety and overwhelming the court system with minor cases.
Police Discretion and Ethical Issues
The police have the power to use discretion to decide who has committed a crime, and what that crime was. This raises some ethical questions because there are some factors that can influence whether a police officer acts on a crime or not. These factors can be race, personal bias, and relationships. Bordner (1983) believes many variables are part of police discretion.
Factors such as the type of neighborhood (whether high crime or low crime), the social characteristics of the alleged offender, as well as the victim, and their relationship, all play into the outcome. This can mean that law enforcement can vary from place to place and in different settings. Because the laws are not equally enforced, fairness and equality will suffer. In some ways this is a good thing because officers will be able to look at circumstances and the setting of the crime and can determine if there are mitigating factors. Wortley (2003) states,

POLICE DISCRETION 4
It is argued that when assessing the culpability of an offender, it is necessary to consider not only the illegality of the offense but also contextual and mitigating factors. Strict adherence to the letter of the law in many cases would be too harsh and justice may be better served by not introducing an offender into the criminal justice process. (p.539)
Some factors to be looked at could include age of the perpetrator, seriousness of the crime, and understanding of the law.
However, in other ways this can be bad. Sometimes police discretion can be based on factors that are not ethical, such as the mood of the officer, whether his/her shift is ending soon, or whether he has racial bias (Arcuri, Gunn, & Lester, 1979). Race is a very big area where police discretion can be used unethically. There is lots of research that proves minorities are overrepresented in criminal cases. Some research has shown that in the past, police officers have used minor traffic infractions as an excuse to pull over minorities so that they can search the vehicle for drugs (Sekhom, 2012). This is one example of selective enforcement. Selective enforcement is described as selecting to arrest one individual over another individual based on their race or other discriminatory factor. Wortley explained that “se lective enforcement of the law allows police to redefine justice in terms of their own priorities, which might not correspond to the priorities of the wider community. When arrest decisions become based on personal judgments, a real potential exists for arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement of the law.” (p.539) When police are given such power to determine who has committed a crime, and what that crime is, they should be honest, fair and equal within the limits of the law, but also take into account any mitigating factors.
Training
Bordner (1983) believes that discretion is an inevitable part of police work. When used wisely, discretion can enhance public safety and fairness. When used poorly, discretion can be a tool for inequality and bias. Since this is the case, police should be better trained to enhance the

POLICE DISCRETION good aspects of police discretion and to decrease the bad aspects. Many officers do not receive
5 training in the use of discretion. If they’re not trained to use discretion wisely and to benefit the public, this opens the possibility of bad decisions by police officers. Those who did get trained in discretion, felt like the training was not very helpful because it was mostly “classroom training” and not “street training” (Arcuri, Gunn, & Lester, 1979). There is informal training from other police officers, especially those officers who are older and have more experience.
But not all officers are lucky enough to receive this type of training and most of them end up learning on the job, sometimes through mistakes. A study by Arcuri, Gunn, and Lester (1979) concluded that officers needed more hours of discretion training, and more realistic training, both in the classroom and out. In addition, the training needed to focus more on quick decision making skills.
Police discretion is a very important part of everyday police work. It is also an inevitable part of police work due to many different laws or statues to be enforced and limited police resources. Discussion should be focused on the best way to train officers to use it effectively.
Training should include ways to discourage racial or social bias when deciding if someone is committing a crime. Training should also include ways to determine the seriousness of a crime, when to give a warning and when to arrest. If officers choose to strictly uphold all the laws, even minor infractions, the courts would be overwhelmed day after day, and justice may not be served. Not all laws are equal. Some infractions are more serious than others. Most importantly, police officers need to learn that public safety is the most important thing. Overall, discretion is an essential part of police work and every police officer needs to learn how and when to use it effectively and ethically.

POLICE DISCRETION 6
References
Arcuri, A. F., Gunn, M. M., & Lester, D. (1979). Some new data on police discretion and training. Criminal
Justice Review (Georgia State University), 4(1), 15-23.
Bordner, D. C. (1983). Routine Policing, Discretion, and the Definition of Law, Order, and Justice in
Society. Criminology, 21(2), 294-304.
More, H.W. (1981). Critical issues in law enforcement. Cincinnati, Ohio: W.H. Anderson Company.
Sekhon, N. S. (2011). Redistributive policing. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 101(4), 1171-1226
Wortley, R. K. (2003). Measuring police attitudes toward discretion. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 30(5),
538-556.