Are we losing the war against crime? Is the public getting a fair break? Has the pendulum swung too far to the left? Do the victims of crime have some rights, too? Are the courts handcuffing the police?
If there were a hit parade for newspaper and magazine articles, speeches and panel discussions, these questions would rank high on the list. Not only are they being raised with increasing frequency, but they are being debated with growing fury.
Last year, probably the most famous police chief in the United States, William H. Parker of Los Angeles, protested that American police work has been "tragically weakened" through a progressive "judicial takeover." These are strong words, but Boston District Attorney Garrett Byrne, then president of the National Association of District Attorneys, easily topped the chief with the cry that the Supreme Court is "destroying the nation." (Despite this rant, Mr. Byrne has since been appointed to the President's newly established National Crime Commission, which has been assigned the task of making a systematic study of the entire spectrum of the problems of crime.)
Publication Information & Recommended Citation
Kamisar, Yale. "When the Cops Were Not 'Handcuffed'." In The Ambivalent Force: Perspective on the Police, edited by A. Niederhoffer and A. S. Blumberg. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn Press, 1970.