Town, County, and State Police

[lashicoN]

I'm not sure where a question like this belongs. As it doesn't pertain to the Second Amendment, but does have to do with laws.

Does anyone know why we have town police, county police, and state police? It seems like it would make more sense to have one policy entity in the state and just have the state police with stations where the current town and country stations are. Wouldn't a centralized police agency be much more convenient all around? Apart from Federal agencies, it would eliminate jurisdiction. There would be a flat standard for filing paperwork and information would move through the police a lot faster if it was all one entity. It just seems strange that we still have three different types of police in one state. Is there any upside to it? Is it simply the fact that different counties have different laws? And different laws require different training and knowledge.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

While we're asking , I'd like to know why some towns have constables instead of sheriff deputies ?

 

[dross]

Indiana, I discovered while I lived there, has more taxing entitites per capita, than a great many other states. My understanding is that this is because of the old township system, so you have city, township, county (and lots of those) and State.

While the different can be annoying, it makes more sense for your local government to be smaller, rather than larger, because your voice gets heard a lot easier the smaller the government entity you're dealing with. An example: When my LTCH was late, I called my State rep, spoke to him by phone, corresponded by email, and had my license within a couple of days. If I had contacted my Federal rep, I would have been lucky to speak with a staffer. My county or city rep, I might have met for coffee.

 

[Dogman]

Don't forget about Town Marshals.

 

[Eddie]

Local Government

Local Government entities have the right and sometimes the duty to create a law enforcement agency to police their area. Certain State Universities also have this right. Each county has an elected sheriff who may appoint deputies (in accordance with the budget the county council sets). Cities may create their own police departments while Towns may appoint town marshalls and deputy town marshalls. It allows the local people to have a say in how their community is policed. Mayors, City Councils, Town Councils and County Councils all have a say in issues like budgeting, number of deputies, benefits, etc. that help give the people some say, not to mention locally elected Sheriffs who have to respond to thier constituents or risk not getting re-elected.

I agree with Dross, it is way better this way than if your town was policed by a group of people who were hired by some bureaucrat in Indy who had never been a part of your community.

 

[Hotdoger]

While we're asking , I'd like to know why some towns have constables instead of sheriff deputies ?

Sheriffs are a county postion.
Constables are a township postion.

Indiana Code 33-34-6

 

[HandK]

Let see one Central police department!!!!! hummmmm you meen like the Gestapo ? I somehow think that would not be a good idea!! It did not work in Germany or USSR they had the KGB and they ran amuk also, history shows us that one police department is not good for the people, great for government.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

No thanks.

I like my government small, weak, divided and inefficient.

 

[lashicoN]

No thanks.

I like my government small, weak, divided and inefficient.

haha. Me too. No idea what I was thinking here.

 

[rambone]

Let see one Central police department!!!!! hummmmm you meen like the Gestapo ? I somehow think that would not be a good idea!! It did not work in Germany or USSR they had the KGB and they ran amuk also, history shows us that one police department is not good for the people, great for government.

No thanks.

I like my government small, weak, divided and inefficient.

These two are right on. It is in our best interest not to nationalize the police.

The founding fathers believed in divided, de-centralized government. They intended that the strongest level of government should be local agencies, followed by other agencies (county, state, federal, etc) that less power on each tier "up the ladder". Today it could be argued that it is the opposite.

The reason for this is because we are a nation of laws, a republic. Police do not need their daily orders given to us from High Command. Policing the citizens is not supposed to structured like the military.

We are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Therefore it follows that we should police ourselves, hiring local people to enforce the laws that local lawmakers have crafted, to govern local land. This design is meant to keep the laws crafted to best suit the people over whom they govern. Our country is too diverse to have blanket policies to govern us all.

What we are discussing about Police forces is the same idea encompassed by the 10th Amendment. What the federal government does nowadays is against what is stated in the constitution. The Federal government is not supposed to make up laws about abortion, gun laws, stem cells research, health care, etc, etc. States or local governments should be in charge of those types of things (if at all). But over time, the federal government has centralized power and gained more strength for itself, taken from the States for which it was intended.

What makes America great under Federalism is the fact that people can find a state to live in that suits them best. If you don't like the high income taxes of one New York, you can move to Florida where there is no income tax. If you don't like the State-run Health Care of Massachusetts, you can move somewhere else that believes in Free Markets. There are not supposed to be blanket laws that govern us all, crafted by bureaucrats in Washington. The Federal Government exists for a very unique and focused set of responsibilities, far from where it focuses its efforts today.

Every strong, tyrannical government wants its power amassed under one central voice, that can easily overstep its legal bounds and propagate illegal orders. This can be seen and studied in many cases throughout history. The U.S. Constitution was a blueprint for avoiding tyranny. If only we still followed it.

 

[Eddie]

Small, Local Police Force

Another thing to consider are the psychological factors of having a small, local police force. I fled the city over ten years ago now because it was too easy to get lost there, too easy to become anonymous. At least in a small town if a cop is abusing his power, that officer has to face the mothers and sons and friends of the people that he arrests when he goes to the grocery store or gets a haircut. Do people still get arrested in the rural areas? You bet. Does the Sheriff, Police Chief or Town Marshall get feedback? You bet. It is too easy for individuals who are bullys and sadists to hide themselves inside of giant bureaucracies. In my opinion it is in the small, local P.D.'s, the kind where when the Town Marshall gives his monthly report to the town board and any citizen can stand up and ask a question that you are more likely to see some justice get served, rather than a monthly quota of arrests getting filled.

 

[jason867]

reps given to lashicon for asking a great question inspiring good responses.

I had never thought about the different levels of government and police agencies until now. After reading lashicon's question, I was thinking it would be better to have a centralized police authority.

But after reading everyone's responses, I agree that smaller is better, to a point of course...

thanks for the eye-opening question

 

[lashicoN]

Thank you very much for the rep, Jason. There have been a lot of great answers on this forum. It gave me a lot of insight.

 

[bigiron]

checks and balances baby!!!!! everyone must stay accountable at all times and its easy to lose bad eggs in large government.

 

[clt46910]

I like the idea of local people in the community being our LEO's. Especially in the smaller towns. They know the people and many times can work things out without someone going to jail for minor things.

 

[Indy317]

No thanks.

I like my government small, weak, divided and inefficient.

What about expensive? Look at Hamilton County: Sheriff's Department, Westfield PD, Carmel PD, Noblesville PD, and Fishers PD. Five head LEOs right there. This doesn't even factor in the town marshals and the smaller PDs up there. I wouldn't mind consolidation, so long as it was effective (ie: If you consolidated the above, having one head LEO with four deputy chiefs would be a waste). In this era, we need to stream line government, not create more wasteful bureaucracies. I am not sure I would support police consolidation on a state level, but at the county level I can see it making some sense....only if done right.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What about expensive?

No thanks.

Cut their pay, slash their benefits and institute a hiring freeze rather than raise taxes.

I like my government small, weak, disorganized and ineffective. Efficiency has been the plea of tyrants throughout history.

(Not calling anyone a tyrant, just stating history).

 

[Indy317]

No thanks.

Cut their pay, slash their benefits and institute a hiring freeze rather than raise taxes.

I like my government small, weak, disorganized and ineffective. Efficiency has been the plea of tyrants throughout history.

(Not calling anyone a tyrant, just stating history).

Yikes. You have heard of "you get what you pay for?" You really want them that small, weak, disorganized, and ineffective? If so, the next time you walk out of Starbucks OCing you likely won't know what hit you when the welfare to work LEO IQ leads him/her to think just opening fire on an OCer is OK under Tennessee vs. Garner.

 

[rambone]

Yikes. You have heard of "you get what you pay for?" You really want them that small, weak, disorganized, and ineffective? If so, the next time you walk out of Starbucks OCing you likely won't know what hit you when the welfare to work LEO IQ leads him/her to think just opening fire on an OCer is OK under Tennessee vs. Garner.

If the Government can take half my paycheck and still not make ends meet, I do not feel sorry for them. They should get less, not more. It is going to be a long, long time before we have a Congress who is capable of streamlining anything. This country cannot survive many more of their "solutions."

If an officer decides to murder someone then he will still be judged by the same peers that any of his civilian counterparts would be judged. He might even meet his maker while committing the murder.

 

[Bruenor]

I thought that we were supposed to support our local sheriff.