Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Police- Centered Explanation of Protest Policing (Prior Research-…
Police- Centered Explanation of Protest Policing
Why authorities react certain ways to protests?
--
2 main concerns
How/ Why dominant responses by authorities changes
Focus
: general degree/strategy changes with repression
Why repressive agents place focus/ act on specifically chosen protests/ movements
Focus:
"allocation of repression"-- protests/ social movements at certain moment in history
Prior Research- Allocation of Police Protesting
“
Threat Approach
”→ explanation for repression in general & policing protest specifically
frequency
and
severity
of repression--
best
predicted by large threats to political elites
Large threats
: use noninstitutional/ confrontational tactics, pursue radical goals, having many goals, large protest size & high mobilization of movement
Smaller threats:
“accepted groups”; have small goals
“Weakness” Approach
→ focus overt state action (repressive attempts) on weak but threatening groups—avoid public embarrassment
Two types of weakness:
1. Weakness- from- within
→ protesters with limited access to government/government officials considered “weaker” for two reasons:
Less access expected to lower costs of repression
Fewer redress routes following repressive acts
EX: marginalized groups; ethnic/racial minorities
2. Weakness- from- without
→ “weaker” protesters rely on external monitoring of influential elites to limit repression; inverse relationship between media coverage & level of repression
Della Porta and Reiter model
- focus: police fit in stable & volatile political opportunities
Explains
: policing styles through crossnationality vs. longitudinally- Western democracies
Stable political opportunities
+
“current configurations of power”
+
history of specific police interactions
=
“police knowledge”
“Police Knowledge”
– perception of their role & external reality
Factors of stable political opportunities:
→ relationship of police & political elites
→ statutory & judicial police restrictions
→ political culture
→ old democracy
Police reactions to trouble sources (2):
1. “”In the job”
→ controversial police decision reviewed by external bodies
text
2. “On the job”
→ potential for violence/disorder may damage property/ cause injuries (including police)
“Flashpoints” model
Explains
: conflict escalation by
→ characteristics of police & polity
→ interactions with civilian & police
"Blue" approach-- Police-centered
Examines:
What police consider a threat
Biggest perceived threat:
loss of control
Elites concern:
diffuse
threats- voicing protest groups goals
Police concern:
situational
threats- signs of loss of control of communities
Centered on 2 elements:
2. varying organizational characteristics across police agencies*
Focus
: types of organizational characteristics that explain police protesting
Sources of organizational variation:
professionalism- 1960s need to reduce police force in protests
size- larger staff devote more hours & more tactical control options in protests
1. institutional features of policing
-- characterizes police (generally) & American police (specifically)
Focus
: maintain control & public order over situations/subjects; determines police effectiveness
Relationship between maintaining control & officer safety; social construction of danger affects: →police understandings of maintaining public order →controlling communities & public interactions
3 Situational Indicators of Loss of Control
(socially produced)
1. Presence of counterdemonstrators
- disagree with protester political claims
Presence of counterdemonstrators:
increased police presence→ ensure control
increased police action → maintain control
2. Types of provocative actions
Property damage by unmanageable/ violent crowds indicate necessary police deployment
"Missile " throwing:
use of missiles-- escalating into rioting mobs
Explaining Police Action at Protests
5 police approaches to protests:
Nothing to see here-
Legal eagle-
Do nothing-
Dirty harry-
Calling all cars-
2 situational concerns significantly affecting police action at protests:
larger protest size- no action or serious forceful action
→ increased probability of dirty harry, calling all cars, & do nothing approach
use of protestor confrontational tactics
→decreases probably of “do nothing” & increases probability of other 4 police approaches
2 significant “weakness approach” variables:
increased college student presence
→ reduces police action- decreases calling all cars response
increased front- page news coverage
→ greater likelihood of police action- decreases probability of “do nothing”
Increased probability of force- based police strategy when: protestors use violence- missile use, net of violence, property damage
Significant
organizational measures
affecting protest policing:
→
police capacity
- wealthier departments= better trained officers & increased ability for legal police reactions
Explaining police presence
3 significant political elite threat variables = increased likelihood of police presence:
confrontational protestor tactics- violence/ property damage → sign of disorder
SMO presence/ support of radical claims
large counterdemonstrator presence → threat to order
Interpreting Results
Findings- police threat VS elite threat
radical/ confrontational tactics
→ poses as immediate trouble for police
→ may aid political elites- estranging movement groups from mainstream support
missle throwing/ aggressive behavior
→ direct threat to police safety & control
→ political elites interest in missile throwing control?
counterdemonstrator presence
→ unflavored by police; increase likelihood of police loosing control
→ political elites prefer counterdemonstrators
Police- Centered/ Blue Approach
strong when focused on key institutional features of policing
→ ex: construction & perception of threat by police agencies during operations
Role of organizational variation-
less supported
→ professionalism & resources available affect police action