Law Enforcement Vs Formal Education

I am probably complicating an easy question, but I’ll try to answer. I’m not convinced there should be any particular order of importance. I would, however, suggest that all three in fact compliment each other and no one element has a corner market of success over another. Although formal education has long been used as setting the benchmark towards a foundation in a variety of professional disciplines, I 'm not convinced it serves as the gold standard for success. In reading the biographies of our class, it occurs to me our varying exposures to learning have allowed us to pursue individual opportunities and navigate through our own personal objectives. For our actions and decision making, we all seem to have achieved moderately successful …show more content…
Vollmer is credited as the “Father of Law Enforcement” (Bond, 2014, para. 4). He was the first Police Chief of the Berkeley Police Department in California and a huge proponent of formalizing criminal justice studies into an academic discipline. It was also during the 60 's and 70 's, presidential commissions emphasized better police standards and training (Bond, 2014). Formal education is good for the individual and brings credibility to the institution. However, there is also some available literature that indicates that higher levels of education don’t necessarily make the best employees. A study of police officers at the Saint Paul Police Department in Minnesota found no such correlation. Research conducted found that police officers with bachelor 's degrees were more analytical problem solvers when dealing with the public but not necessarily the best at speaking to the public. The inference being that they were less interpersonal and that the public might likely prefer public servants who were, at least, perceived to be good listeners and who were emphatic (Bostrom, 2005). The author cautioned, however, that this could be more so the type of personality who enters college. Other undetermined factors not accounted for according to the author were police officers who went to college after employment. Additionally, research …show more content…
Certifications are necessary for a few reasons: legal necessity, the burden of liability or to professionalize the targeted workforce to an industry standard. For years, ASIS International has standardized security management through their board certification process (ASIS International, n.d.). Another necessity is to demonstrate mastery of a technical skill; the alternative misuse could mean accident or death. And we know from past forum conversation that armed security guards are required to undergo formalized training in order to carry firearms. A certification process reduces liability for the organization and benefits public safety in the event the guard should discharge their weapon while in the performance of their duties. The Center for Investigative Reporting (2014) supports this methodology reporting that of the one million security officers operating in the United States, unknown amounts are armed. Of the 15 states, there are no formal training requirements to openly carry a firearm - nine of the states do not conduct any federal criminal background check when hiring (Gabreilson, 2014). The report 's finding include a study using FBI statics which reflect a greater likelihood of shooting confrontations at bank robberies when private armed security is present (Gabrielson & Walter, 2014). These statistics help to galvanize the point home that industrialized societies must