Page 33 - 1Proactive Policing

Pro-Active Policing

concept has evolved and layers of meaning have been added. The original ship is long gone, but
parts of it endure in new forms and settings throughout society.

The distinction between high and low policing is increasingly relevant in the wake of the terrorist
attacks of 11 September 2001. The paper reviews the content of the high policing paradigm and

addresses recent criticism. Its first part provides an update of the defining features of high
policing: absorbent policing, power conflation, protection of the state and use of covert informants.

It is, thereafter, argued that the high and low distinction is considered to run deeper than
anticipated by the various bodies reporting on the policing and intelligence failure to prevent 9/11.
In part three, the place of private security agencies in high policing is assessed. Private high

policing must be taken into account, but it only shares in some of the defining features of high
policing and is lacking in others. Finally, the contrast between high and low policing is examined in

relation to symbolic significance.

The article considers the nature and practice of high policing in the security control society. It

looks at the effects of the new information technologies on the organization of policing-intelligence
and argues that a number of ‗organizational pathologies‘ have arisen that make the functioning of
security-intelligence processes in high policing deeply problematic. The article also looks at the

changing context of policing and argues that the circuits of the security-intelligence apparatus are
woven into, and help to compose, the panic scenes of the security control society. Seen this way,
the habits of high policing are not the governance of crisis, but rather governance through crisis.

An alternative paradigm is suggested, viz.: the human security paradigm and the paper concludes
that, unless senior ranking policing officers—the ‗police intelligentsia‘—adopts new ways of

thinking; the already existing organizational pathologies of the security-intelligence system are
likely to continue undermining efforts at fostering security.

I want to direct you to a term High Policing – new way to look at modern policing methods and
emerging organizational changes in law enforcement. High policing of all sorts is still viewed by

scholars, judges, and politicians as ―corruption,‖ ―deviance,‖ and or ―scandal‖ and dealt with by
illusion and impression management. If we look at harassment endured by targeted individuals as
enhanced mobbing overseen by authority of the law (local, state, federal) it points to pre-existing

conflict at some level (most likely personal derived from monetary or influence issues) where
public resources are used to eliminate one party for the benefit of the other. No template exists as
to how and why harassment was initiated or by who as there is no viable ways to counter or

33