28. November 2022

Reactive Law Definition

There are significant differences between officers in the three work style categories in identifying the crimes for which they would almost always lay charges. 31% of police officers who describe their work as primarily proactive say there are no crimes that almost always result in charges, compared to 9% of those who are mostly reactive, or 4% who are a bit of both. This suggests that public servants who are primarily proactive are less likely to base their decision-making on the nature of the crime. The three main patrol functions in traditional reactive policing are routine patrols, immediate response to calls, and follow-up investigations (Cordner & Sheehan, 1999: 385-394). Responsive policing can be defined as responding to specific requests from individuals or groups in the community, including “immediate response to calls” and “follow-up investigations”. However, the purpose of a routine patrol is not so simple. Traditional thinking suggests that the mere presence of a police vehicle acts as a deterrent to crime (Trojanowicz et al., 2002). According to Crank (1998), routine or random preventive patrols are by definition reactive police services. There is no initiative on the part of the officer or organization to address any particular area or issue in the geographic patrol district. However, it can also be argued that routine patrols are necessary to facilitate a quick response to call handling. For almost all types of informal measures, there are no obvious differences between officers whose work falls under the three types of police style. One exception is the use of formal warnings.

Almost half of public servants who indicated that their work was primarily proactive use formal warnings (46%), compared with about one-quarter (27%) of those who said a bit of both, or 19% who said they were mostly reactive. As a result, the data suggest a gradual increase in the use of official alerts as officers identify their work as increasingly proactive – or as police services encourage proactive policing. In contrast, proactive policing involves “police acting on their own initiative to obtain information about crime and strategies to combat it” (Crank, 1998: 244-245). It can also be interpreted in a variety of ways. For example, a public servant who responds reactively to a sent call could still proactively resolve the issue by mediating between the parties or taking informal action. Unlike routine patrols, directed patrols require police officers to monitor specific areas identified by problem or crime analysis when they do not respond to dispatch calls (McKenna, 1998). Directed patrol is more proactive than random preventive patrol; However, the problem-oriented component of policing involving the Community in solving crime problems is still lacking. A U.S. study found that proactive policing led to more arrests, detentions and charges than reactive policing (Seagrave, 1997).

Possible reasons included the need for more vigorous action to gain “legitimacy and control,” as well as officers who had already made a decision that led to proactive engagement (Seagrave, 1997: 148). This finding seems counterintuitive compared to what might be expected when officers use problem-based policing. These results therefore suggest that a clear distinction needs to be made between proactive engagement and problem-based policing practices (Section 7.3 below). There are very few significant differences between public servants in the three categories of work style in the methods used to force attendance at the court. Police officers are just as likely to use a subpoena, advertisement or false promise, regardless of how they define their duties. However, there are differences in the conditions they may attach to an OPC obligation and the reasons they give for holding them a JIR hearing. Police officers who suggest that their work is mostly proactive are more likely to impose conditions that they are unrelated or that they do not have alcohol or drugs. They were also more likely to clearly specify the conditions they usually attach to businesses. In addition, public servants who are primarily proactive are twice as likely not to detain because they do not detain a young person for multiple offences (15% vs.

30%) and are less likely to detain if the youth is a repeat offender (15%) compared to public servants whose work is somewhat at a time (36%) or primarily reactive (47%). Similarly, proactive officers are less likely to “almost always” detain a repeat young offender (8%) than those whose work is both reactive and proactive (23%) or mostly reactive (33%). No civil servant, whose work is mainly proactive, cited “when the minor is on trial” as grounds for detention, compared to 17 per cent of civil servants whose work is somewhat of both, and 22 per cent whose work is mainly reactive. Public servants who describe themselves as primarily proactive almost always consider informal measures involving minor offences (54% vs. 13%) and almost twice as likely to be committed for provincial offences (38% vs. 17%). This may be because the higher proportion of CSO and OLS leaders describe their work as primarily proactive; while patrol work was generally characterized as primarily reactive or a bit of both. However, there were a good number of patrol officers who “almost always” considered informal measures for minor and provincial offences.

In these circumstances, they suggested that this should be an integral part of the exercise of their discretion in cases involving minors. The word proactive is the opposite of reactive, which means that the legal approach is based on an ex ante vision rather than an ex post vision. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the word proactive refers to acting in anticipation of future problems, needs, or changes. [2] Thus, the proactive legal approach challenges the traditional retrograde and failure-oriented legal approach by acting in anticipation of litigation, taking control of potential problems, proposing solutions, and initiating rather than reacting to failures and shortcomings. [3] When proactive law is tailored to businesses, the approach is referred to as proactive contracting and proactive contract management. The field of legal research developed in Scandinavia in the 1990s and gradually attracted attention. [18] Proactive contracting involves contract management, risk management and business process management. The word proactive is overly reactive opposition and refers to acting in anticipation of future problems, needs, or changes. [19] Empirical studies on contractual skills[20] and research on dynamic skills[21] have shown that promoting proactive behaviour in companies can be beneficial. The proactive General Counsel must be able to identify the precursors of responsive governance.

The first, and often most remarkable, indicator comes in the form of data. No effective communication can balance a disorganized pool of data. Policymakers will inevitably look for a “needle” of actionable intelligence in a “haystack” of available information. It is important to note that avoiding a disorganized data pool does not mean avoiding a large data pool. A large amount of data can work both in favor of administrators and against them. The difference is whether the data is well organized or not. The more data, the more important it is that the information is well organized. We tried to find out where in the continuum of “reactive” and “proactive” police officers are doing their work on juvenile delinquency. Agent responses fall into three broad categories: mostly reactive, mostly proactive, and a bit of both, including agents who found their work fairly regular, both responsive and proactive. The distribution of responses from officers assigned to different tasks is shown in figure IV.15.

Just over half (51%) of police officers in our sample reported that their duties are “a bit of both” (reactive and proactive). Many patrollers in this category indicated that they can respond reactively to a call from headquarters, but that, whenever possible, they try to resolve the incident proactively. They felt that, despite the idea that their patrol work is purely reactive, they actually do both types of policing.