In a democratic society, it is believed that every person regardless of the cultural background has civil liberties or what is commonly known as personal freedoms. Civil liberties are the individual guarantees and freedoms that the government respects and that it cannot counter or abridge by law or judicial interpretation. The scope of civil liberties vary from country to another and because of democracy, different nations are faced with the question of to what extent is enough freedom among the citizens? This enigma is commonly encountered when it comes to law enforcement particularly among reserve police units. The reserve police units are extreme volunteers paid or sometimes unpaid members of the police empowered with the ability to arrest individuals committing a crime in their presence. In most cases, these police officers tend to overlook the existing civil liberties within their jurisdiction when arresting people and thus can use force or even ignore the freedoms to equal treatment and right to life. This causes arguments of whether it is right to reduce civil liberties among reserve police units and the impact this will have on the safety of the community from the law enforcement units.
Literature Review
Civil Liberties
In many cases, people often find it challenging to identify the difference between civil liberties and civil rights. As a result, various legal experts and political scientists have strived to understand the distinction between the two irrespective of the fact that the Constitution protects both of them. The easiest way to understand the difference between civil liberties and civil rights is by envisioning that civil liberties are personal freedoms that limit the power of the government by protecting the freedoms of the people that the government cannot legally abridge (Durgun, 2014). A simple example of this is that the government is denied the authority to deny people the free exercise of religion; thus the national government cannot legally stop anyone from pursuing their choice of religion. This applies whether the federal government feels that certain religions are misguided or inappropriate. It means that the citizens of the country can legally create their religion even if the society and the government disapprove its appropriateness. However, the choice of practice can only be regulated if it invades the rights of other citizens. Additionally, the government of the United States is denied the capacity to impose cruel and unusual forms of punishment on people for their criminal acts (Friedman, 2010). Although, through the years, the definitions of cruel and unusual have been expanded by the courts to govern the rights of the law enforces in torturing the suspects. It is in this case that the issue of civil liberties concerning reserve police units arises.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On the other hand, civil rights refer to the capacity of the government officials to treat people equally and that every decision that is made should be based on individual merits instead of their gender and races among other personal characteristics that set people apart (Friedman, 2010). An example of civil rights is that it is against the law for any learning institution under the administration of the state government to treat the students unequally because of their differences in race, gender, age, sex or ethnicity. Though this was a common practice in the past, the courts ruled it as a violation of civil rights and every person was considered equal in the presence of the national government.
The Reserve Police Units and Law Enforcement
A police officer is a warranted law employee in the police force, and their core responsibility is to keep the community safe by either stopping crimes before they happen or to apprehend criminals. The police officers are granted the power by the national government to arrest individuals and detain them, and in this process, their powers are governed by the law on the extent to which they can use of force in the arrest and gaining information from the arrested suspects. The reserve police units are the same as police office officers except that these groups of law enforcers serve part-time in the absence of the regular police force and may either be armed or unarmed. Additionally, they take their roles on the agreement that they are unpaid volunteers or sometimes paid as police officers within their affiliated organizations.
The power granted to reserve police units have been questioned as to what extent can they ignore civil liberties as a way of becoming efficient in their roles? With the increase of public demonstration or criminal activities, the significance of reserve police units continues to grow relevant as means to keeping the community safe. However, these special polices are sometimes forced to go overboard on social liberties and overlook the guarantees such freedom of the press or even religion if a conducted activity threatens the lives of other individuals with the community (Terrill, 2003).
It has been argued that the modern law enforcers cannot do their jobs effectively if they are only limited to ineffective powers limited by civil liberties (Wiecek, 1988). It is because people have become aware and they know that they have been given freedom that even the government cannot disrespect. In turn, they misuse these guarantees by disrespecting the law and threatening the lives of their neighbors. For example, since an individual known that he has the right to create and pursue the religion of choice, he can easily indulge in the kidnapping and torturing other individuals because he assumes that he is protected by the right to security and privacy. In such a circumstance, it is only senseless to allow the reserve police units to stand by and watch as the atrocities take place. Another example is when an individual is involved in the drug business, he will comfortably continue to carry on with his business as long as no one can invade his privacy or torture him so that he gives information of who are the drug cartels.
Civil liberties are put in place to protect the citizens from the unfair acts of the government, but this does not necessarily mean that it approves of criminal activities within the community that threatens the safety of the average citizen (Posner & Vermeule, 2007). From this vantage point, it thus means that it is only sensible to reduce civil liberties in reserve police units so that they can serve in their roles efficiently. This entails using torture whenever necessary as long as it will aid in providing necessary information concerning the cartels; denying anyone freedom of speech it is used in a way that promotes peril, or even evasion of privacy if a person is practicing illegal activities.
Reserve police units are the extended arms of the law who volunteer to ensure safety whether they are paid or not and this translates to the idea that when it comes to the law, it is no longer about types of equipment but the safety of the citizens (Cohen & Dasgupta, 2013). The practice of civil liberty often inhibits the law from performing their duties as people are today well informed that their freedoms govern them. This if not thoroughly assessed promotes danger in the country particularly if it denies the government the right to overlook the provided guarantees. Reducing civil liberties in the reserve police units is a safety protocol and understandable if they are practiced within governance and not out of greed. The law has its powers but at the same time it is controlled by the existing limits, and this equally applies to the freedom of the citizens (Meunier, Koontz & Weller, 1995). Though one is allowed to practice various activities that satisfy his or her will, they cannot overlook the comfort of others. These limits to civil liberties include freedom of speech that does not promote hatred, and freedom of religion if it does not put the lives of others in peril among other.
Conclusion
Reducing civil liberties in reserve police units is a sensible idea, and that should be allowed if it means keeping the community safe. The reserve police units volunteer to enforce the law and prevent crimes, and because of this, the national government should understand their responsibility and grant them the right to reduce the set guarantees and freedoms of the people. Therefore, in conclusion, the reserve police units can only serve better if they are granted the necessary power and authority over the society that they are protecting from criminals that might easily overuse the freedom that they have under the Constitution.
References
Cohen, S., & Dasgupta, S. (2013). Arming without Aiming . Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Durgun, F. (2014). Restorationist Counter-Enlightenment: Thomas M'Crie on the Concept of Civil Liberty. Journal Of Religious History , 38 (4), 476-498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9809.12053
Friedman, L. (2010). Civil liberties . Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.
Meunier, G., Koontz, T., & Weller, R. (1995). Psychological characteristics of reserve police officers. Journal Of Police And Criminal Psychology , 10 (3), 57-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02811065
Posner, E., & Vermeule, A. (2007). Terror in the balance . New York: Oxford University Press.
Terrill, W. (2003). Police Use Of Force And Suspect Resistance: The Micro Process Of The Police-Suspect Encounter. Police Quarterly , 6 (1), 51-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098611102250584
Wiecek, W. (1988). Liberty under law . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
