Use of Force in Maintaining Social Order

In many instances, the global jurisdictions have well-crafted mechanisms for which they have been combating crimes through. Quite often, this has been through the use of force as an instrument of coercion for people to align with the provisions of the law and maintain social order. Social order refers to the maintenance, conservation and the enforcements of the ordinary mechanisms of associating and behaving in the society. The assertions that social orders are realized purely out of consensus and other shared values as deduced from the socialists point of view are less sophisticated to define the sustenance of social order. Instead, there are more aspects that are associated with or aligned with the prospective approach to sustaining social order. The main social cement of establishing and sustaining social order is anchored on three essential pillars: socialization, self-interests on each individuals and social sanctions.

If this sample essay on"Use of Force in Maintaining Social Order" doesn’t help,
our writers will!

Trust an expert

Socialization is particularly often argued to be the ultimate determinant of human conduct. As a result, socialization is the may be taken to refer to the right or wrongs within the society. People internalize both values and norms to their daily lives conducts that leads to social conformities and the overall achievement of social order. This aspect is also identified in functionalism which states that social order involves a web of shared norms or values regulated during the daily lives. Social sanctions on the other hand are defined as basic rewards or punishments for individuals conducts as well as the social action from a societal point of view that is anchored on the societys shared values.

Social sanctions may be categorized into either formal or informal perspectives. For instance, an informal category of the social sanctions would ideally a process of isolating and teasing away from individual peers through social sanction that go beyond the boundaries of the common norms that a society share. Formal social sanctions on the other hand are rather enforced via a formal setting as well as established institutions such as the legal systems or the government. Social sanctions therefore helps in regulating human conducts via what the society is fond of reacting towards a social sanction. This correlation was deduced from the inference of Marxism and reaffirms the important role of force in maintaining social order in the society.

Self-interest on every individual also plays a pivotal role on the aspects that defines the ultimate reason why people pursue and conforms to the provisions of the law. People follow instructions or the provisions of the law and conform to them since humans and their ancestors have been proven to have been mammals that lived in packs. Consequently, in case an individual is isolated from the rest of the society, it would imply increased difficulties for people to pursue their lives through an integrated society in which they cannot survive in isolation. Besides, it is wiser to align oneself to the provisions of the law and also abide by a peaceful societal way of life as opposed to a chaotic one. Consequently, people follow the directives and regulations and further assist in maintaining social order since it makes all other things easier to pursue and achieve. However, in some instances, individuals are not in support of the idea of voluntarily obeying the provisions of the law and the regard frameworks for realizing a sober and stable society. This implies that the law enforcement agencies have and the role to play by coercing such groups to follow the provisions of the law and align them to the correct way of behaving.

Functionalists however claim that a society entails a huge integration of several functional institutions. Besides, they also believe that all parties contribute equally towards the development of an infrastructure that is responsible for constraining human behaviors and overall choices in the long run. There are numerous arguments presented on this subject matter from functionalism point of view that are considered flawed since it does not focus on conflicts within the society. For instance, in the light of these conflicts, it is arguably correct that force is a prerequisite to overcome them. Functionalism theory makes strong assumptions in the sense that the society lives through constant situation of consensus.

French sociologists, Emile Durkheim also stated that the society is itself a being. As a result, it forms the basis upon which all norms and values pertaining to individuals are passed on and socialized. The sociologist also claimed that despite the fact that humans are homo-duplex creatures; the positive side of their beings often dominates the negative side since values within the society are often internalized and conceptualized by individuals. As a result, claims positing that social orders is derived from consensus still carry some credible truths but cannot be justified in isolation due to changing societal frameworks across different communities globally where values are liable to changes.

Social order may also be expressed through the functional prerequisites within the society. In case a society is completely unable to adapt, then, the natural world systems would eventually practice a form of survival for the fittest. This marks the essence of force in ensuring that all individual players regardless of their fitting in the society are part of the elaborate societal shares of the gains and the resource use in the society ensuring equitable share as much as possible.

Similarly, Marxism also shares of the opinion that social order is deduced from economic oppression and power. In this regard, Marxism provides a critical assertion that social order is deduced from a false-class consciousness as well as the ideologies of the ruling class. The economic basis that is employed to control and further limit the scope of the working class and choices they makes in life is also a major factor that defines the use of force in mainstreaming equity. Besides, the capitalists also manipulate the superstructure of the society including schools and the legal systems that are abound by the ruling class thus, contributing to social disorder.

The law enforcement readers also high regard the use of force. In particular, increased sensitization of the peoples right and privileges as far as the delivery of security and other best interest functions by the government places a significant pile of pressure toward enhancing the performance or delivery of the social order among the legal instruments in place. For the law enforcement agencies to realize sustainable ideals of peaceful coexistence in the society, Davis (2012) asserts the importance of using force to perpetrate justice and increase the prospects of legal sanity into the social lifestyles. However, Davis argues that the law enforcement agencies or the units tasked with ensuring that social order is maintained must make well instituted approaches to social order in order to mark the proficiency and utilization level of force in order to avoid unnecessary damages that law enforcement agencies may inflict on innocent persons as they pursue their basic goal of maintaining social order.

Nonetheless, forcible execution the law has been a major concern for majority of people due to the faulty expulsion of individuals in mainstreaming social order. For instance, Udefuna, eta l. 2014 defines scenarios in which law enforcement agencies collude with burglars and other potential security threats towards defrauding the citizens and causing malevolence to the citizens including stealing and killing innocent citizens. Udefuna base his analysis on the Nigeria case which has witnessed this turn of events. The author therefore accuses Nigerian security agencies from the increased incidences of extrajudicial killings on innocent citizens as well as gross destruction of properties. These attributes are central to the violation of the ultimate roles of the police officers in safeguarding the security of the citizens.

Udefuna et al. however identifies these scenarios, he also defines the important role of use of force by the security agencies towards ensuring sanity and law abiding scenario in any given setup. These attributes makes up some of the main concerns that individuals must ascribe to in order to ensure high regard for social order in the society. The law enforcement agencies are charged with a singular responsibility of ensuring safety across the entire areas of their jurisdiction. In this regard, the violation of this ultimate focus in a major element of discord those individuals must ascribe to in order to ensure that they are all times guardians of order. Social order is therefore a function of forcible execution of legal provision that culminates into the use of force.

Use of Force in Maintaining Social Order

In Support of the Argument

Davis, K. R. (2012). Use of force investigations: A manual for law enforcement. Bloomington, IN: Responder Media.

Daviss work "Use of force investigations: A manual for law enforcement, " is highly endorsed for law enforcement readers due to the increased scrutiny by the members of the public and the media laying a lot of pressure on them. In this manner, Davis (2012) objectives and intentions are to provide the police with a better contemplation of the subject of the utility of force, particularly in the midst of conflict and violence. The guide on the utility of force is essential, given that it does not take place in a vacuum; rather it happens within high psychological human connections that need adaptive choice reaching.

Further, Davis (2012) indicates that the decision-making ought to be examined, developed and investigated. In this light, Davis postulates that the police need to read, particularly about the utilization of force to bring in objective and support based promotion and to defend the law. The text utilizes examples that are founded on real life cases joined to the systematic chapter arrangement, making the book simple to contemplate, as well as driving the message home (Davis, 2012). Davis also provide illustrations of how the police who do not understand their utilization of force execute their undertakings as law enforcement officers.

Additionally, Davis (2012) seeks to itemize the utility of force as a frequently misinterpreted subject by the individuals policing through identifying the myths and actuality. Davis also demonstrates that the media, both in print and television news together with the Hollywood effect perpetuate information that creates an inaccurate general understanding to the public and law enforcement. Consequently, incorrect public understanding has developed on the use of force because the truth and evidence presented in the media are lesser clearer than the actual police experience.

Davis (2012) work also examines the legal limits of the use of force and provides an explanation about educating methods like situations founded study mechanisms that comprise force and the significance of undertaking subsequent action appraisals. Davis also discusses agency policy with a precise contemplation of the manner through which individuals make choices while subjected to pressure and the vitality of equaling policy and process with people and thoughts. The book is also significant in accounting for the utility of force. Other chapters discuss the emotional effects like memory misinterpretation and remembrance and the chain of command responsibility (Davis, 2012). However, despite the book being in law enforcement and use of force, it fails to relate the utilization of force to the community. The book concentrates so much on the use of force, disregarding that policing is complex, and that force is employed in communities to maintain...