Can More Police Equal Fewer Prisoners?

Eric Bailey reports on an intriguing conundrum in today's LATimes, will federal stimulus money channeled to state law enforcement frustrate the state's declared policy of reducing its prison population by sending yet more low level offenders to prison?  Of course the law professor's answer is "it depends."  It depends on how those police officers view their job.  If, as many now do, they view themselves as "door men" to the carceral system, charged with moving people efficiently into the justice system, more police can mean more prisons.  If instead, police apply distinctive strategies to try and use force deployments to deter and prevent crimes, they can diminish crime without adding to prison populations.  New York is an exciting example.  During the height of Mayor Giuliani's "quality of life" campaign during the late 1990s, police arrested thousands of young people involved in minor misconduct.  Jail populations went up some, but not too much because most cases were resolved with either short sentences or dismissals.  Prisons, in contrast, began a population decline that has continued for a decade.

In California, unfortunately, it looks more like the first case scenario, with big money going into drug interdiction and enforcement efforts.  What we need almost as much as a new state strategy for corrections, is a new local strategy for police.  Despite having a progressive and educated population, the Bay Area has not been at the forefront of such efforts.  With new police chiefs just appointed in San Francisco and Oakland, let's hope change is on the way.